As a professor and specialist in instructional technology, I was greatly impressed by Abigail Kelly’s recent op-ed in your publication. The piece offered a thoughtful and timely examination of several of the most significant ways artificial intelligence may enhance learning in the near future. I was particularly encouraged to see a student articulate so clearly AI’s potential not merely as an emerging category of software, but as a cognitive partner in the learning process. A student perspective advocating for AI education made this one of the most compelling opinion pieces I have read all year. I recently addressed a related concern—student resistance shaped by instructional “prohibition”—in this publication.
Abigail Kelly’s perspective reflects what many students are expressing today. The primary barrier to the meaningful integration of AI in education is not student dishonesty or resistance to new study strategies; rather, it is the reluctance of some instructional staff to redesign learning experiences and assignments in ways that align with evolving learning theory. In this respect, instructional practice is too often lagging behind student need. Through both my research and my seminars for first-year college students on AI, I can affirm Abigail’s observation that some instructors continue to prohibit its use outright. Without a nuanced understanding that AI is not a one-size-fits-all tool, such blanket resistance is misplaced. AI can serve as both an instructional resource and a learning support for all stakeholders in education. For too long, concerns about cheating have overshadowed thoughtful engagement with the broader pedagogical value of these tools. Fortunately, that dynamic is beginning to shift, allowing AI’s genuine educational benefits to receive the consideration they deserve.
The future will favor those who are willing to embrace emerging technologies and apply them in ways that advance academic achievement. By contrast, those who remain committed to gatekeeping and prohibition will increasingly find themselves out of step with educational progress. One can only hope that this transition occurs sooner rather than later, so that institutions may move forward in exploring the significant opportunities now before them.
Mark Taormino, College of Southern Nevada