Written by Martin Kwan
The use of generative artificial intelligence (A.I.) tools, such as ChatGPT, has been a disruptive development given their powerful yet controversial capacity to replace human input. It has received mixed reception in the education sector. Some U.S. universities embrace their use with an open mind and have even integrated it into the curriculum.1
But many other U.S. (and also foreign) universities are limiting students’ use of A.I. tools.2 This situation is not limited to higher education, but also in some K-12 schools.3
The scope of the imposed limits varies widely depending on the institutions. Some schools have banned A.I. usage completely;4 some limit the number of use of such tools per academic year (as in Hong Kong where ChatGPT is not free to use);5 many leave the choice to be determined by individual professors;6 some require disclosure of usage or even the prompts/instructions given to the A.I. tool;7 some have set a prohibitory default rule, namely students cannot use unless allowed;8 etc.
Yet, surprisingly, there is little discussion on whether and how students’ academic freedom has been duly taken into account when their academic use of generative A.I. tools is limited. It is observable that many schools have not formalized or elaborated much on their A.I.-usage policy, reflecting that their stance and policy are still constantly developing.9 For example, the University of Dayton (UD) explained their approach that “until there’s greater knowledge on the pros and cons of AI’s effect on student learning, UD shouldn’t rush into policy making just yet.”10 Others, such as Rutgers University, have issued “suggestions” for faculty to choose from, meaning that there is yet a uniform binding policy.11
In light of this, this article highlights the relevance of students’ right to free inquiry. This is an essential consideration to be taken into account when balancing the pros and cons of such use.