As AI (artificial intelligence) is slowly making its way into everyday lives, professors are torn about whether it should be embedded into college coursework at Sam Houston State University. Does AI enhance education or weaken it?

Why it matters

Universities nationwide are navigating how to use generative AI in classrooms while also protecting academic integrity and keeping critical thinking skills. At Sam Houston State University, faculty across the Mass Communication and English departments are confronting both sides of the debate.

AI vs. Critical thinking skills

Nathan Ridings, an English professor, worries that frequent AI use may come at the cost of foundational writing.

• “Students who use Ai often think it benefits them, but external assessments and studies suggest a decline in writing performance” Ridings said “Without learning foundational writing and communication skills, students may lack the ability to differentiate quality writing.”
• Ridings argues that writing is more than producing polished sentences, it is the process that develops organization, analysis and clarity. If AI generates structure or ideas students may bypass the mental effort that builds those skills. This aligns with a report from the University of Southern California, which suggests that AI can cause students to “avoid learning” when used as a shortcut instead of a supplement.

Assistant Professor Dixuan Cui from the Mass Communication department takes a different approach, inputting AI into assignments while setting boundaries.

• Cui encourages students to use generative AI for ideation, such as identifying media trends, keywords, or notable figures.
• His assignments require students to identify current media issues, propose solutions and apply course concepts, with AI positioned as a brainstorming tool, not a replacement for an original thought.

Cui’s method aligns with AI in the Modern classroom: Benefits and best practices, which highlights how structured AI use can personalize learning and enhance engagement. For Cui, AI does not replace critical thinking; it enhances it.

Does AI unfairly accuse students?

Beyond skill development, faculty also question if AI detectors are reliable enough to determine academic dishonesty.

Shengjie Yao, also a professor in the Mass Communication department, shares those concerns

• He finds it dangerous for universities to rely on AI detection software when making academic dishonesty decisions. He states, “AI generators can and do generate false positives, as even sophisticated models can’t definitively distinguish between human and AI-generated writing.”
• Yao argues that the most reliable way to ensure authenticity is to require students to write in class or by hand. He even asks students to run their own work through AI detectors, acknowledging they may still be flagged, a reality that underscores the technology’s limitations

Bottom line

At SHSU, the debate focuses on two questions: Does AI affect students’ critical thinking skills? And do AI detectors unfairly accuse students?

As professors decide what is dishonest and not, the future of generative AI in the classroom may depend not so much on the technology itself, but on how it is carefully implemented.