Department chairs: AI in the classroom

It has been three years since the AI chatbot, ChatGPT, became available to the public. Since then, almost everyone has adopted the program in some aspect of their life to eliminate unnecessary and often mundane tasks; these users are often students. This year, the class of 2026 is the last high school class that experienced high school without AI.

For many, this fact is a shock and a realization that hasn’t been considered. Since its launch, students have actively leveraged AI to effectively aid, scrutinize and complete their assignments, whether homework, papers or projects. This shortcut has been presented as a constant frustration for teachers and administrators at SA, who have had to create AI usage rules and regulations.

An observational study conducted last year found that 74.2% of SA students use AI. The 2025-2026 Student Handbook states: “Course instructors will set their own policies regulating the use of generative AI in their courses, including allowing or disallowing some or all usage of tools.”

Across the educational field, humanities departments are undeniably the most affected by AI in the classroom. Early on, ChatGPT could write a 5-paragraph essay, with the quality improving progressively.

Drew Gloger, Head of the Humanities Department at SA, said, “[AI] really impacts us a lot in terms of the assignments we give. The old-fashioned take-home essay or textual analysis assignments are tricky because they’re really ripe for the use of AI.”

Over the last three years, humanities teachers have been pressured to adapt their assignments in an attempt to eliminate the use of AI. This year, especially, many students are experiencing a rise in in-class assignments.

Gloger says, “I think you’re going to see more in-class writing, more use of blue books, more creative type assignments that ask students to weave in their own personal experience, things that are harder for AI to speak to, creating authentic audience opportunities in assignments.”

One of the unique aspects of SA is the assignments teachers create. Students will write few classic five-paragraph essays, but instead, they will create comic books as a sequel to a book, to explain a philosophy, or to tell the story of their life. As Gloger stated, these assignments are nearly impossible for AI to complete, guaranteeing that students will call on their own analytical, creative, and unique thinking skills to complete them, primarily with a pen or pencil.

Hilary Younglove, Head of the Arts Department, parallels the Humanities Department’s drive to return to pen on paper, saying, “I feel like the arts are a place where we can get back to basics like playing with mud and making things with their hands.” While the Humanities and Arts Departments have their differences, a fundamental need for human thought and creativity connects the two disciplines, which has become increasingly evident with the rise of AI.

Last year, Younglove taught a class entitled AI-Inspired Tactile Art, where she explored AI’s ability to produce art with her students. In this class, students used AI as a “brainstorming tool.” Additionally, the class explored experimentation with various AI programs. In our interview, she shared some of her observations, many of which were unsettling.

Younglove said, “One person put in a prompt about their sister jumping in a pool and jumping out. The video that came back showed this person without a bathing suit on from behind.” At first, the generated prompt was funny, but quickly an unsettling and “scary” notion took over: the generated video could be child pornography and be misinterpreted.

Additionally, Younglove explained that the older students were more apprehensive than the younger students towards the use of AI tools. This may be a continuing trend as more students grow up with AI from the beginning of their educational careers.

To learn more about AI in the art classroom, Younglove experimented with various platforms and formats. She shared some of her creations with me and the product was both scary and jaw-dropping.

In one example, Younglove had videoed herself speaking, then put the recording through an AI platform that generated her speaking different languages. There was almost no difference in mouth movement, and a source told her that the accent was nearly perfect.

Up to this point in AI’s development, Younglove says, “it is important that we just use it as a tool and not rely on it because I want people to think creatively on their own. But I see it as another tool that people can use to enhance their work.”

Through her experimentation, Younglove concluded that AI tools are best used for brainstorming when stuck, saying, “It’s a good tool, but also a very dangerous tool.”

Lisa Zavieh, head of the STEM Department, also stressed the word “tool.” Zavieh said that she has told students to ask ChatGPT for basic information about topics, saying, “I can have it as an added tutor…it can often do a better job [explaining concepts].”

However, Zavieh also stressed that the AI program “is not always right and [students] have to trust their own judgement.”

In an example, Zavieh describes an at-home physics lab that instructed students to ask ChatGPT to explain why something worked. Then, the students had to write a letter to ChatGPT explaining why its response was incorrect.

Assignments like Zavieh’s are simple yet effective ways teachers are combating the rising use of AI in the classroom. It is part of a movement across departments to promote AI as a tool, not a substitute for independent thinking.

Maitane Elorza, head of the Language Department, explained that her department experienced its most significant shift when translation tools, such as Google Translate, became available to students. The struggles language classes experienced in the mid-2000s mirror the challenges faced by other departments today.

To prevent students from completing their work with a translator, Elorza said, “We mainly reduced [at-home written work] to class time.” Now, tests, written work and oral exams are done almost exclusively in class. If students choose to use a translation tool to complete their homework, it is their test performance that is impacted.

Although it is near impossible to cheat with AI in a language class, Elorza said, “I think one way to use it smartly for students at home is to use it for extra practice.” When asked if ChatGPT’s Spanish skills were comparable, Elorza said, “It’s pretty good. I’ve been quite pleased.”

In our interview, I mentioned Younglove’s experiment with the AI platform that created videos in a different language. In response, Elorza said, “In order to have proper intercultural exchanges, it’s much better if you speak the language and if you’re trying to think in that language and making the effort to communicate rather than just relying on a phone that will do the job for you.”

Elorza said she fears the increased isolation AI could cause for society, saying, “You might just end up interacting with a bot for most of the day and that’s really sad for me. I don’t want to imagine a future for my children that is like that.”

Zavieh said, “For us to fairly assess, we have to see what you can do in your own head or with just a paper and pencil.” This statement has become the guiding light for the 2025-2026 school year.

Every teacher interviewed says AI is a tool for students. However, AI has also been a challenge that teachers have been forced to embrace and balance in their classrooms.

Although a tool, many students (not just at SA) have abused AI, using it to complete the majority, if not the entirety, of their assignments. Gloger said, “When you seed your critical thinking to some technology or tool that does it for you, I worry about what that means in terms of the ability to be good citizens.”

This is the first publication of an AI at SA series. The next article will focus on students. If you are interested in sharing your thoughts, please feel free to reach out at [email protected]. Thank you!