From the editors

With great power comes great responsibility, especially when it comes to using artificial intelligence in the classroom.

AI is becoming more powerful and sophisticated every day, making its use more attractive and convenient for students throughout their education. But with such a powerful tool at our disposal, it is more important than ever to set limits on its use.

AI technology comes in many forms. Editing software like Grammarly makes suggestions to improve essays and generative models like Chat GPT are just some of the most popular and obvious uses of AI in an educational context. They offer students the opportunity to have their writing reviewed by a second person to improve their grades, and they also provide new opportunities for plagiarism.

But what if AI had the ability to stimulate students’ imaginations, assist them in their research, or improve their time management?

According to EducationWeek, models like Hello History allow students to have text conversations with historical figures using easily accessible information. It has the potential to make learning history engaging, personal and, most importantly, fun.

But AI tools aren’t just for students. Educational assistants like EdPuzzle, Education Copilot, and Teacherbot can help teachers and professors create lesson plans, grade assignments, create project outlines, and more.

Artificial intelligence is unlikely to replace the essential role of teachers, but it has the potential to take over the most tedious and time-consuming tasks that contribute to burnout and lead to teacher shortages.

The goal of using AI in education is to complement and enhance our teaching and learning practices, not to detract from them – and there must be limits to this.

At Baylor, the issue is being played out in real time. Last month, Provost Nancy Brickhouse approved the creation of a committee to address common questions and concerns students and faculty have about AI.

Led by the Dean of the School of Engineering and Computer Science, the committee will provide much-needed guidance on best practices related to AI inside and outside the classroom.

In the meantime, Baylor’s Office of Academic Integrity suggests that professors improve their students’ honesty with clever workarounds that outperform AI. When assignments have to be completed by hand and course-specific homework is given, it’s harder for AI to deliver A-grade results and easier for professors to spot robot plagiarism.

Professors and universities have drawn a clear line. The question is no longer whether AI belongs in the classroom, but to what extent. The challenge is to define its role as a tool rather than letting it become a replacement for human teachers.

As for students, the burden of boundaries is on us too. We are not at Baylor to simply pass our courses, and an assignment or test grade is only worth as much as what you learned from it.

If you cheat your way through class by tricking your professors into using AI, you are cleverly cheating the system, but you are also cheating yourself out of a real education.

How smart will you feel when you reach this stage in four years and realize that the only thing that taught you to be better, sharper, more intelligent, more critical, more educated was an AI?