Artificial Intelligence (AI) is, supposedly, the unavoidable future. This is something many students majoring in the arts and the humanities have not only heard constantly, but have also felt in the change in curriculum. There are less papers being assigned and more of a focus towards in-class writing assignments and discussions. Open to students and professors, the AI in Humanities and Arts conference was held on Apr. 13 in O’Brian Hall to discuss actions taken and plans for the future to help humanities students learn the necessary skills to succeed whilst navigating this new world of AI.
Ruth Mack, associate professor in the Department of English describes the main obstacles professors are faced with best.
“AI offers us some kind of practical problems — how do we teach students to be smart, thoughtful, and ethical actors in the world? And even bigger challenges, like showing students the worth of their own individual thinking.”
Mack and many other instructors feel as though that by allowing AI into academic spaces, students will forfeit their right to enhance their skills for the sake of convenience.
Other professors chose to include AI in their curriculum. Dr. Barbara Avila-Shah, adjunct assistant professor of Spanish, for example, is very adamant on her students using AI in the classroom for many purposes; one of which is to ask questions with faith that students will “go in there, have an idea, and then from there they can apply the principles we’ve learned in class.”
Beyond that, Avila-Shah incorporates AI for project-based learning. One project is to interview a native Spanish speaker and ask AI to create a mural to represent their cultural background based on the information gained from the interview.
“Part of the project was then to discuss the appropriateness of some of these pictures, right? … They actually have to use what they learn in class, about the culture, to be able to decide if this was appropriate or not.” Avila-Shah explained.
Her main motive for using AI in the classroom is to give students another path to use in order to exercise their knowledge, effectively using the flaws of AI to aid her students.
On the contrary, some professors are against the use of AI for students. One of the most notable being Adam Drury, clinical assistant professor of English, who began his presentation with a description of a scene from the TV show “Neighbors.” The scene depicts one of the characters, Steven, writing an apology letter to his neighbor using AI after harassing her. In this process, he constantly readjusts the prompt given to Microsoft’s AI feature, Copilot, often asking it to make his letter more emotional and flattering, until he is finally satisfied with the result.
“In any case, his writing is a total failure, because his reader isn’t buying it… I, too, often know that what I’m reading isn’t my student.” Drury’s issue, one that is shared by a majority of the staff, is the idea that machine writing is emotionless and without charm. To him, the process far exceeds that of the product.
“They can still make a product exist — from Buzzfeed slop to a college research essay. So, product or process, what are we doing?”
And that is the question: what are we doing? What should we be doing? What truly is the “right” method? Well, the short answer is: we don’t know.
While both of the extremes — strictly pen and paper to the acceptance of AI — have their pros and cons, no one knows what the correct way to go about things is. In either situation, instructors have made it clear that their top priority is to have students leave their classrooms with confidence in their skills and confidence in the ever-changing world we live in.
The features desk can be reached at features@ubspectrum.com
