EDITORIAL | Avoid the Institutionalization of AI

thehoya.com · Feb 27, 2026 · Collected from GDELT

Full Article

Georgetown University professors could very well begin to see the phrases “indelible mark” and “valuable insight” a lot more often. With artificial intelligence (AI) constantly in the news, debated in academic spaces, raised as a threat to higher education and banned in many classrooms, the university’s Feb. 23 announcement to further integrate AI into academics almost comes as a surprise. The university plans to make Google’s AI assistant Gemini directly accessible to faculty and staff, eventually expanding this access to students, and introduce a range of other generative AI tools. AI topics will additionally be incorporated into both the College of Arts & Sciences (CAS) and McDonough School of Business (MSB) curricula. The Editorial Board takes issue with this explicit approval of faculty and students using generative AI because it implicitly encourages dependence on these tools. In doing so, Georgetown risks undermining the very intellectual curiosity it seeks to cultivate. A university spokesperson said the decision to begin integrating AI into Georgetown’s academic life will include multiple tools to ensure it is secure. “Unlike consumer versions of AI tools, Georgetown’s enterprise instance of Gemini ensures that user chats and data are not used to train or improve the underlying models,” a university spokesperson wrote to The Hoya. “Faculty and staff will receive access to Gemini first, followed by students. This phased approach allows faculty and staff to engage with training resources first, and prepare to support students on effective and appropriate engagement with these tools when applicable.” We acknowledge the university’s intentions behind this new policy and support efforts to ensure that our community engages with AI responsibly. Denying the growing role of AI in academia and everyday life would not only be naive but also detrimental to students as they enter their professional lives. With this in mind, we strongly applaud the university’s introduction of the Tech, Ethics and Society minor in 2022, which provides students with class content to better understand digital technology and its responsible use. Furthermore, through courses such as “AI and Democracy” in the CAS, Georgetown continues to encourage students to develop their understanding of AI’s practical and ethical considerations. The Editorial Board thinks that Georgetown is right to provide educational means to understand AI and its evolving place in modern society, but AI tools need not be integrated into the learning process itself. Georgetown cited the decision to use Gemini as a result of its “native integration with Google Workspace,” which implies students will easily be able to incorporate AI into their everyday online tasks. Georgetown’s endorsement of Gemini risks normalizing dependence on AI as a tool to offload independent thinking, hindering students’ analytical and creative skills. Generative AI models also have an undeniable effect on creativity and diversity of thought that Georgetown hopes to encourage among its students. With ChatGPT shaping how people think, ideas will eventually become repetitive and fall flat. While it is undeniable that students do — and will continue to — use AI, the university should not be encouraging the use of these tools that can make the actual learning process secondary. Instead of normalizing shortcuts, Georgetown should strengthen students’ intellectual aptitude so they can solve the world’s problems without relying on a language learning model to do it for them. After all, AI’s risks go far beyond circumventing the thought process — it can lead to outright plagiarism through lack of attribution in generated answers or lead to the complete fabrication of information. It may also create increased skepticism on the part of the professors who wonder if their students are improperly using AI against classroom policies. This policy further creates a messaging issue for the campus community. While the university wrote in the announcement that faculty will have control over AI use in their classes, its simultaneous institutional support for Gemini sends the opposite signal to students and faculty alike. It reads as an endorsement of AI in any context. The same day as the initial announcement, students received another email in which they were told not to upload or share course materials to AI platforms. This exposes another risk that the university is assuming through the integration of AI policy ––– it may harm university goals of protecting intellectual property and intellectual discovery. Nonetheless, the Editorial Board recognizes that some students support the university’s efforts to incorporate AI. Peyton Rydzewski (CAS ’29), a student majoring in computer science and math, said Georgetown’s integration of Gemini could support students in an academic setting. “Georgetown’s efforts to boost AI proficiency through coursework and the implementation of Google’s Gemini is exactly what students need to supplement their career preparation,” Rydzewski wrote to The Hoya. “My only wish is that we would be supported in accessing more of these tools and sooner.” The Editorial Board is not ignoring the reality of AI — it is indeed pervasive and will continue to play an expansive role in our lives. A nuanced understanding of AI and AI-based tools provides a competitive advantage to students as they prepare for an ever-changing workforce. However, we believe these advancements should not come at the expense of intellectual development. Universities should be a pillar of resistance in our current political moment of democratic backsliding and increased threat of misinformation. Institutionalizing AI use in a manner that makes it easier to avoid critical thought or plagiarize is how universities will fail at this mission. We support Georgetown in expanding coursework and course offerings that examine AI’s ethical, political and social implications. Continuing to fund research initiatives and support students interested in AI as a discipline is worthwhile. However, Georgetown should not blur the line between studying AI responsibly and promoting its routine use in academics. The Hoya’s Editorial Board is composed of six students and is chaired by the senior opinion editors. Editorials reflect only the beliefs of a majority of the board and are not representative of The Hoya or any individual member of the board. ABOUT THE CONTRIBUTOR The Hoya’s Editorial Board is composed of six students and is chaired by the senior opinion editors. Editorials reflect only the beliefs of a majority of the board and are not representative of The Hoya or any individual member of the board. Your donation will support the student journalists of Georgetown University. Your contribution will allow us to purchase equipment and cover our annual website hosting costs.