Rapid advancements in artificial intelligence have catalyzed the development of several platforms capable of performing menial tasks to highly complex requests. These programs have grown so powerful that, for many, they risk becoming more of a crutch than a tool. Teachers increasingly worry that students are leaning too heavily on these systems, fearing that bypassing the rigor of academic study through cheating and plagiarism undermines the cultivation of foundational knowledge and intellectual growth. I share these concerns regarding the inevitable consequences of AI’s unrestricted use. However, I am firmly convinced that with carefully designed guidelines and thoughtful implementation, classrooms can derive immense long-term benefits from the use of technologies such as ChatGPT, Google Gemini and Claude. For this reason, I contend that educators should not merely set aside their apprehensions about AI but actively embrace it as a valuable academic resource.
The panic surrounding students’ use of artificial intelligence is far from unprecedented. Time and time again, educators have been reluctant to change when the emergence of new technologies reshaped their instruction. Notably, the calculator – widely recognized as an essential device in the present day – was initially deemed a controversial gadget for learning mathematics when first introduced to schools in the 1970s. According to a Science Daily article from 1975, there was already one calculator for every nine Americans. Calculator prices were projected to fall to just $10 in the following year, cheaper than most textbooks at the time! This led many teachers to conclude that, regardless of restrictions within the classroom, many students likely had access to calculators at home and could use them to cheat on assignments outside of school.
In my opinion, this mirrors the challenges we now face with AI. Just as calculators were introduced to enable students to tackle more advanced equations, artificial intelligence holds enormous potential to serve as a playground for deeper research and foster critical thinking. However, both technologies have similar drawbacks, as AI can complete basic assignments and calculators can solve simple formulas, with – in essence – the real issue being laziness and overreliance on this convenience. Fortunately, just as the concerns of the 1970s eventually gave way to balanced and discretionary use of calculators, I believe that adopting modern platforms will mitigate many potential drawbacks while encouraging more thoughtful application. In doing so, education can undergo a bittersweet but necessary evolution – one that embraces the future while reshaping how we learn.
Restricting access to something only heightens our craving for it. Psychologist Dr. Robert Cialdini connects this tendency to the principle of scarcity – the idea that when a resource becomes scarce, it also becomes more valuable. A 2011 study illustrates this concept by partially attributing adolescent cigarette smoking in the United States to the curiosity of trying what was off-limits. These findings suggest that if such behavior were not prohibited, engaging in it would lose much of its appeal. I see a clear parallel in the restrictions placed on AI. By constantly emphasizing the dangers of this software, educators inadvertently underscore the very misconducts students may be tempted to participate in. If the use of artificial intelligence were encouraged for constructive purposes instead, such as the benefits outlined earlier, far fewer students would be drawn to what was initially forbidden. In short, certain actions are better off normalized than banned.
I am not ignoring the reality that even if AI were incorporated into classrooms and its benefits promoted, many individuals would still use it to cut corners. That said, as detection tools for AI continue to advance, students will be increasingly deterred from relying on AI for plagiarism and cheating. Likewise, teachers are adopting additional safeguards to limit misuse, including in-class writings, oral presentations, pop quizzes, online exam proctoring and handwritten work. If I were in charge, I would go a step further by increasing the weight of in-person work in determining final grades. This would compel students to engage with the material directly and develop a genuine understanding of their curriculum. In addition, I would introduce required courses at the primary education level that train students to use AI platforms to their advantage – both to accelerate their learning and to deepen the complexity of their studies. In the end, the goal is simple: students should come away educated, no matter the medium they use to achieve it.
