On Sept. 22, The Record sent out a survey to understand and analyze data on AI use across campus. During the seven-day open period, 70 students, 31 faculty members and 16 staff members responded to the survey. 

Overall, students are more abstinent than faculty and staff. 43% of students said they never use AI, against 19% of faculty and 13% of staff. Only 20% of students use AI somewhat often or frequently, versus 45% of faculty and 50% of staff. 

Out of the 70 students who responded, 30 of them claimed to never use AI. The predominance of the “never” students was mostly justified by external factors. When asked which of several options most concerned them about AI, 28 students chose the environmental impacts and 27 cited opposition to AI companies’ political and financial influence. 30 expressed concern for individual mental well-being or intelligence, while only six cited religious beliefs. 

Among the 40 students who said they use AI to some degree, nine mentioned using it to assist with brainstorming or idea generation, four cited explaining concepts or assignments and seven said they used AI for studying; mock quizzes, study guides, practice questions, etc. 

Open-ended responses revealed the use of AI as accessibility for students for whom writing in English could be a struggle. Bruno Barać, a senior psychology major from Croatia, said, “It’s really hard to write a paper and have all of the grammar right so I use Grammarly to just check my grammar or see if I used the right tense.” 

Regarding the use of AI among faculty, 37 students said their professors don’t include AI in assignments, 12 said it’s included with an opt-out and seven said it’s required, with business and first-year courses mentioned repeatedly. 

Michelle Horning, professor of accounting, said that she views it as a valuable learning tool. She encourages its use for learning. However, she said, “AI is not permitted for any graded work that is part of the student’s course grade.” 

Horning also explained that the necessities of the workplace, according to recent graduates, present another reason to encourage AI use. She said, “Employers expect new graduates to be able to understand AI and how to use the tools to be more efficient and accurate.”

Jonny Arias, a fifth-year business major, said, “They like to teach us the ethical usage of AI and how it can help us rather than being used to do things for us. It’s normally used to deepen our thinking, organize information, cross-check facts and things like that.”

In terms of faculty data, 25 of the 31 respondents said they use artificial intelligence. Of those, 45% reported it as an occasional use, while 36% said it happens somewhat often. Meanwhile, 6 faculty members said they never use AI. Of those respondents, four described restructuring their courses, implementing handwritten in-class work, and banning AI use in their syllabi.

Alex Dugger, content production manager for More Than Just Stories, said that he has worked for 20 years as a software developer and emphasized how the industry suddenly changed in the past two years. 

“I have friends who are graphic designers, who are photographers, who are artists; and yeah, they’re losing jobs left and right because companies are streamlining,” Dugger said. “And I can’t fault the companies too much. I mean, a little bit. Why wouldn’t you use the tools that keep you competitive when we live in a capitalist society?”

Sarah Method, associate professor of art, said, “It has made me rethink many assignments… putting emphasis back on effort, time, practice, and perseverance to achieve lasting results.” However, 12 answers revealed that faculty rely on AI for academic work and course planning, and five explicitly detailed using AI to summarize notes, meetings, or long text. 

Isabel Woodcox, a junior environmental science major, said, “I had a professor who was absolutely obsessed with AI … Once, I answered a question correctly and he had to ask Gemini to confirm. It felt both humiliating and hurtful that I couldn’t trust my professor to listen to me or to give us truthful information.”

Despite these findings, a survey conducted by GC’s AI Task Force in February reflected a more AI-influenced campus. 

In that survey, 9% of students and 2% of faculty reported not being familiar with artificial intelligence. Most students (48% somewhat, 18% very familiar) and faculty (49% somewhat, 27% very familiar) reported exposure to the technology. 

Also in February, 11% of students reported using AI daily, and 26% used it several times per week. Seven months later, 4% of students reported using AI frequently, while 16% reported using it somewhat often. Statistically, the student body is weakening its engagement with AI progressively while faculty and staff maintain significantly higher adoption rates.

The Record acknowledges that there is a certain amount of bias involved in the data from both The Record’s survey in September and the AI Task Force’s survey in February. Any comparison of the two is bound to be somewhat flawed on account of not knowing how much overlap there is between the sample groups, as well as bias in each sampling and in creation of the surveys.