TLDR: Cornell University faculty are adopting a dual approach to generative AI (GenAI) in the classroom, with some innovating its use for enhanced learning experiences while others are reverting to traditional methods to prevent misuse. A recent survey revealed 70% of students and 44% of faculty use GenAI weekly, highlighting both excitement and concern over its impact on critical thinking.
Cornell University is witnessing a nuanced and evolving landscape regarding the integration of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) into its academic practices. Faculty members are exploring both innovative applications and cautionary measures, reflecting a broader recognition of AI’s ‘good and harms’ within the educational environment.
According to Steven Jackson, vice provost for academic innovation and chair of the Cornell GenAI Education Working Group, ‘There is a recognition that generative AI brings both good and harms to the classroom environment, some really fantastic opportunities and advances for faculty work and for student learning, and also some very real and deep challenges.’ This sentiment underpins the university’s approach to navigating the rapidly evolving AI landscape.
A survey conducted by the GenAI Education Working Group in spring 2025, involving over 700 faculty and nearly 2,000 students, revealed significant engagement with AI tools. A notable 70% of students reported using GenAI tools at least once a week, compared to 44% of faculty. Both groups expressed enthusiasm for GenAI’s potential, yet also voiced concerns about its capacity to hinder genuine learning.
Innovative applications are emerging across disciplines. Dr. Laura Barré, an assistant clinical professor of nutritional science, is utilizing AI to generate realistic case studies and simulate patients, allowing students to interact as medical providers. She likens studying with AI to ‘studying with a very confident C+ student,’ emphasizing the need for a critical mind to turn this into an advantage. Similarly, Professor Kizilcec encourages students to debate AI-generated arguments, prompting them to delve deeper into course material to formulate counter-arguments. This approach aims to foster ‘deep engagement’ and prepare students for ‘lifelong learning in a world where AI is pervasive,’ as Kizilcec states, urging students to ‘control and reason over the outputs of AI and not surrender their agency.’
Also Read:
- Law Schools Navigate AI’s Evolving Role in Admissions and Legal Education, With Some Exploring Mandatory Use
- Michigan State University Unveils New Campus-Wide Guidelines for Generative AI
Conversely, some faculty are implementing strategies to mitigate potential misuse. Professor Karns, for instance, has observed that projects previously requiring a full semester can now be completed in mere minutes with AI. In response, she has shifted to in-class assessments using paper and pencil and introduced 15-minute, one-on-one ‘job interviews’ to assess content understanding. These adjustments, while time-intensive, are seen as crucial for safeguarding the learning process in her classes.
