Eliza Dieck , Opinions Editor
On Wednesday August 20, faculty, administrators and students gathered in McCardell Hall to discuss the future of Artificial Intelligence (AI) at Sewanee. In this tumultuous technological era, students and professors are grappling with AI’s place – if it has one – in the Sewanee curriculum.
Although AI presents a multitude of harms through plagiaristic influences, disinformation and environmental damages, the modernizing world is seemingly encouraging students to harness a set of ambiguous “AI skills” to expedite certain tasks.
Sewanee does not possess a uniform policy that addresses AI. However, in a letter to the Class of 2029, Jed Straessle (C ‘26) Chair of the Honor Council, stated, “Using AI without permission is not only a violation of Sewanee’s Honor Code, but a cheapening of your education.” This “permission” is given at the discretion of individual professors and typically specified in their syllabi.
In an interview with The Sewanee Purple, Eleanor Dean (C ‘27) stated, “the lack of coherence between professors and departments on AI use for assignments can be overwhelming.” However, Dean acknowledged the difficulty in forming a schoolwide policy because of the constant evolution of AI platforms.
When asked about the possibility of a uniform policy, Dr. Puckette, a professor in the math and statistics departments recalled, “Years ago, the math community was shocked when we allowed calculators in our classes. There was never a University calculator policy. There were appropriate places and inappropriate places. We have to figure it out and we will figure it out.” She stated, “there are plenty of appropriate places to use AI.”
Dr. Tucker, a professor in the English department, collaborated with her students to formulate a collective AI policy. This invitation allowed students to advocate their stances on AI use and whether or not various AI platforms align with each students’ academic goals. The policy drafted by the class excluded AI from the curriculum unless explicitly stated on the assignment. Each student will sign this policy, pledging to adhere to the standards they forged for themselves.
In alignment with Dr. Tucker’s class, Dean stated, “There’s a lot of fearmongering in the national media about students in Gen Z using AI to do every little school assignment, but I’ve found that if you sit down and talk with the students these articles are supposedly about, you’ll find that many of them are passionate about doing the work themselves and not letting AI do the thinking for them.”
Dean described the use of AI as a “frictionless process, and so it is easy to become alienated from its consequences.” Dean is referring to the tremendous amount of water some data centers utilize to power these AI platforms. Dr. Puckette discussed the value in being aware of these environmental issues, but the difficulty in quantifying the impacts because data centers do not release information.
Dean and Dr. Tucker view this issue as a “critical conversation” because users are not warned of the harmful environmental implications that ensue after asking ChatGPT a simple question.
Dr. Puckette echoed this statement affirming that “We are being force fed AI You have to actively turn it off. You have to move into a responsible role.”
Institutionally, we boast our eco-conscious endeavors and initiatives. Therefore, we possess the duty as students, faculty and administrators to consider the inevitable and harmful environmental ramifications yielded by AI.
At first glance, a class that teaches ethical AI use seems like the solution to this problem. However, Dr. Tucker stated that by the time the University creates and approves a course, the curriculum would likely be obsolete because of the rapid reengineering of AI platforms.
At the end of our interview, The Purple asked Dr. Tucker to offer any advice or suggestions to students who are considering utilizing AI for an assignment. Dr. Tucker encouraged students to ask themselves, “Where is the learning going to happen? I am going to learn from doing this?” According to Dr. Tucker, “the learning happens with vulnerability and vulnerability happens with failure.” She affirmed, “We need to learn to dread that a little less.”
In an article published by the University of Chicago titled “In the AI Era, Is a Liberal Arts Degree Obsolete?”, the author stated, “A liberal arts education breaks open echo chambers, exposing learners to a spectrum of intriguing ideas and providing frameworks to think critically about complicated topics. […] you need to be capable of turning a skeptical eye to even your own ideas.” Dr. Tucker advocated the importance of relationships in the liberal arts education wherein faculty are capable of supporting students through academic struggles by encouraging critical thinking and skepticism.
To conclude this article, I offer an edited version of our beloved University motto, EQB. Behold How Good it is to “Learn” Together in Unity.
Opinions Editor Eliza Dieck attended the Faculty Gathering on August 20, 2025.