Spend any time on social media platforms as a student and you will soon be inundated with adverts for AI study tools. It is no longer the writing process which tools like JenniAI, Mindgrasp, and Scholarcy target, but research and revision. Subsequently, the audience are not just undergraduates – many tools are advertised as significantly lightening PhD reading loads.
It’s easy to see why these tools are appealing; scientific reading can be onerous, and many students are new to the levels of workload that are expected of them. Add students whose first language is not English into the mix and there is a ready audience for the promised simplification.
AI is clearly on the minds of the university; the chaplaincy put on a talk about humans thriving in an AI world and a lively discussion at the most recent Education Zone revealed attendees’ attitudes to AI varied wildly. Many said they did not trust the output, while others valued the ease of use and the capability to have a conversation with your study tool.
A spokesperson for the University of Stirling said: “In conjunction with the Students Union, the University is continuing to monitor and react to developments in AI to ensure we adapt as technology progresses.
“We will continue to provide staff and students with training, guidance and resources to ensure everyone is aware of the opportunities and implications of generative AI for study and employment and are both confident and competent in the deployment of AI in relevant contexts.
“The academic integrity module – which is recommended to all new students – includes a section on AI, and Student Learning Services are also running sessions on AI for students.
“Meanwhile, University policies with respect to AI have been updated, including the academic integrity and proofreading policies.”
Katie Gethings, Vice President Education for the University of Stirling Students Union, added: “The Students Union is aware that AI is likely to become more ingrained in our university experience and working alongside the university, we aim to make sure that AI information is accessible and helpful for students.”
The president of the university’s Computer Club, Laurence, is convinced AI tools will change society for the better. He said in a Discord chat, “I see the future of studying with AI as fantastic. Everyone with an internet connection now has access to a world class personal tutor for any topic they want to learn”.
There is undeniable truth in this statement, and he suggests the university ought to provide “a brief tutorial to students about how to prompt chatGPT for help when learning a skill, writing, or researching about a topic”.
Jeff Meadowcroft from Student Learning Services offered similar insight: “If we extended [problem-based learning] over a year or two years of actually teaching students the technical skill and […] getting to the point where they understand what they are doing, for many people and in many areas of learning that would be quite natural.”
Of course, this level of integration of AI into university teaching would require all faculties to agree on which tools to use and how – a feat that seems nearly impossible.
While AI offers unprecedented access to interaction with knowledge, there is the uncomfortable reality of paywalls. Few of these study services offer their full capabilities for free. Does this negate the advantages that AI present? Students from disadvantaged backgrounds will certainly have a bigger challenge to access these advantages than their more privileged peers.
There are other dangers with these summarizing tools. Reading the Terms and Conditions of just one of
them, Mindgrasp, reveals very quickly that by uploading materials users grant “a non-exclusive, worldwide, perpetual, unlimited, irrevocable, royalty-free, fully sublicensable (through multiple tiers) and fully transferable right” to these materials to the company.
Their advertising actively encourages uploading textbooks and lecture recordings. There was no way to find out what Mindgrasp does with the data which it collects, an aspect users of AI tools often overlook. No LLM company collects large amounts of data out of the goodness of their hearts; they want to train larger and better models to further improve their technology.
It is unrealistic to presume students will thoroughly read the T&Cs of multiple AI tools before using them – and they might actively avoid it.
In a recent chat WhatsApp chat with fellow students, one of them (who prefers to remain anonymous) summed up their attitude to the tools: “The whole ownership of property thing is a capitalist ideal we need to let go of.” They were only partially joking and a more cavalier attitude to copyright has long been a hallmark of online discourses. Of course, none of that changes the fact copyright infringement is at best immoral and at worst unlawful.
Are AI study tools the great equaliser, democratising access to knowledge and evening out disparities in study skills, or is that only a clever marketing ploy, designed to convince desperate students to part with their money? The truth likely lies somewhere in the middle, but one thing is undeniable: AI is here to stay, and both students and faculty will need to find ways to incorporate it meaningfully into the university experience.
The university faces the challenge of devising a way to allow them do so in innovative and constructive ways, while helping them avoid the pitfalls of copyright infringement and plagiarism and ensuring students still learn how to be critical thinkers. None of that sounds easy – because it isn’t.
Featured Image Credit: Unsplash