New Anti-AI Policies Coming to Reed?
In this year's Orientation Week edition of the Quest, J-Board included a note regarding the surge in AI use on the Reed campus. It stated that in the 2024–2025 school year, they received one case of AI-related academic misconduct, while they received 14 such cases last year. These numbers are certainly concerning and raise questions about the future of academic integrity on campus, especially as AI continues to advance.
Last spring, faculty created the Ad Hoc Committee on AI in the hope of creating a solution to the growing problem of academic misconduct with AI at Reed. To better understand the committee's goals, the Quest sat down with one of its chairs, political science professor Tamara Metz. According to Metz, the committee hopes to create a campus-wide policy on AI that aligns with the college's mission. Metz noted that opinions can differ vastly. Letting ChatGPT write your paper is one thing, but what about spell-check or research? “This is why the default no-use policy is so important,” said Metz. “Because it’s going to force faculty and students to have a conversation about what’s acceptable.”
Beyond personal opinions, what tangible steps are being taken to stop the spread of AI-related academic misconduct? That, as it seems, is a much more complicated question. Peter Steinberger, a political science professor who has taught at Reed since 1977, sent a document to his students stating his concerns about AI and offered a solution. Put simply, each student will be assigned a laptop without internet access, and students will write essays in a classroom designated for this purpose. This way, students can forgo the stressful process of written blue book exams, allowing students to revise their work and submit pieces they are confident in.
However, Steinberger’s solution has not been met with support from the college. According to Metz, “there are some technical and security reasons why this specific strategy that [Steinberger] is proposing is likely not to work.” While this solution has not been accepted, Metz gave assurance that even in the committee's formative stages, it is working towards finding a permanent solution. She stated that they are experimenting with and funding different strategies, but the answer is immensely complicated, not only because of disparities in opinion between individuals, but because it's incredibly difficult to create a solution that does not fall into conflict with the Honor Principle.
When asked why he decided to create an anti-AI policy for his students, Steinberger said he was deeply conflicted, but felt it was necessary in response to global trends. “It’s not that I distrust my students,” said Steinberger. “But what I worry about is the temptation.” When faced with strict deadlines or complex material, the temptation to use AI can make even the most driven students academically dishonest. Professors do not want to surveil their students, but as AI continues to advance, the recent J-Board data suggests that students' ability to adhere to the Honor Principle for academic misconduct is eroding. How can we reduce the temptation without breaking trust between students and professors? This trust, as Metz stated, “is an essential piece of what good teaching and learning requires.”
The current AI situation is clearly disheartening, and it begs the question: what is the future of academia? While it's impossible to know the answer, Steinberger said that he is incredibly concerned. “This is Frankenstein's monster,” he remarked. “I worry that the horse has left the barn, and there's not much we can do about it.” Steinberger expressed these reasonable worries about the state of the world at large, but when asked about Reed, he stated, “I’m not so worried about Reed; I think we’re small, and I think we can handle this kind of thing.”
When asked the same question, Metz responded, “I think that Reed is uniquely situated to provide human education, a place where humans can learn to think, and speak, and write, and create as humans.” While nobody can give us a clear answer about the future, it seems that at our little college, things aren’t so bleak as they appear. “I think people want to learn,” said Metz. “It's just difficult right now.”