Source Details

{
    "source_type": "extension",
    "content_hash": "e621860ae263e4c462a7b7310b3d0816b7a1afd186bfcc00f0c2817eede8c0db",
    "submitted_via": "chrome_extension",
    "extension_version": "1.0.18",
    "original_url": "https:\/\/www.nytimes.com\/2026\/09\/15\/us\/universities-ai-warnings-enthusiasm.html?emc=edit_ufn_20260918&nl=from-the-times&segment_id=226689",
    "parsed_content": "AdvertisementSKIP ADVERTISEMENTSupported bySKIP ADVERTISEMENTAn M.I.T. Report Warns A.I. Is Causing \u2018Cognitive Surrender.\u2019 Universities Are in a Bind.As A.I. upends education, university leaders have been all over the map about how to respond. It can be very confusing for students.Listen \u00b7 10:19 min Share full articleSome university leaders have said schools must embrace A.I. to stay relevant.Credit...Philip Cheung for The New York TimesBy Mark ArsenaultDana GoldsteinAlan Blinder and Sarah MervoshSept. 15, 2026See more of our coverage in your search results.Encuentra m\u00e1s de nuestra cobertura en los resultados de b\u00fasqueda. Add The New York Times on GoogleAgrega The New York Times en Google The worries that artificial intelligence is degrading education have been building for months. Students are using it for everything, including cheating, and a recent report out of M.I.T. said it is triggering \u201ccognitive surrender.\u201dMany university leaders are embracing A.I. with enthusiasm anyway.As A.I. leaders warn about the dangers of their own technology, the dissonance between the optimism of university leaders and the fears of many students and professors may increase. Professors and students are often in a bind about what they should do: Use more A.I. to stay relevant, or dial back to preserve learning and thinking?While some politicians and A.I. leaders are warning about possible doomsday scenarios for humanity as A.I. models advance, many campus leaders are focused on the existential threat the technology poses to universities.The committee at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology studying A.I. use released a number of alarming findings, including that the technology has caused \u201cmajor shifts in campus culture,\u201d isolating students who are skipping office hours and ditching communal studying. Getting answers from a bot can create \u201cthe illusion of learning\u201d for students who reach for A.I. \u201cat the first hint of struggle,\u201d the M.I.T. committee wrote in its August report.AdvertisementSKIP ADVERTISEMENTAt the same time, \u201cthe potential of these technologies to augment work across campus is immense,\u201d the committee wrote.The M.I.T. report crystallized some of the thinking in higher education about A.I., but top administrators have been embroiled in debates for several years. Administrators have often been the most eager to champion A.I. efforts, while many faculty and students remain more skeptical.\u201cI think you have to lean in, but you have to do so in a way that\u2019s thoughtful and ethical and asks the right questions,\u201d said Wendy Hensel, the president of the University of Hawaii, where she presented an A.I. strategy to regents in July. \u201cThe right answer to A.I. is not just \u2018no.\u2019 It can\u2019t be. It has to be approached with curiosity and understanding of the implications.\u201dThe hodgepodge of policies universities have created to respond to A.I. often reflect the confusion about how to proceed \u2014 with some clear dos and don\u2019ts, but often a lot of wiggle room for faculty and students to figure it out on their own.AdvertisementSKIP ADVERTISEMENTExperts Warn That A.I. Harms LearningFor a motivated student, an A.I. chatbot can function as a sort of tutor. Chatbots can break down the steps in a math problem, surface unexpected sources for research papers and offer feedback on writing.Still, a growing body of research suggests that A.I. use can also harm learning.A recent study of 26,000 Chinese secondary-school students found that A.I. adoption led to an 18 percent increase in homework scores, but a 20 percent decline in scores on secure exams. The implication was that rushing through homework with help from chatbots degraded the deeper learning needed to perform well when the technology was not available.ImageThe M.I.T. committee studying A.I. use said it is isolating students.Credit...Cody O'Loughlin for The New York TimesOne 2025 study out of M.I.T. found that people who used chatbots as writing assistants struggled to remember what they had written only minutes after finishing their essay. \u201cYou basically didn\u2019t engage any of the memory networks that would actually help you remember,\u201d said Nataliya Kos\u2019myna, a M.I.T. researcher who worked on the study.Other research has shown that people who have greater trust in A.I. and rely on it more are more likely to have lower cognitive engagement.AdvertisementSKIP ADVERTISEMENTBut A.I. can be hard to avoid. Chatbots are embedded within the Google Classroom suite, which is nearly ubiquitous in schools, and within many online learning systems used by universities.Some tools block outright cheating or plagiarism and allow professors to toggle specific A.I. capabilities on and off. But the most popular chatbots among students will instantly complete entire assignments, including research papers, on a student\u2019s behalf.Many Universities Are Embracing A.I. AnywaySian Leah Beilock, the president of Dartmouth, has argued that preparing graduates to use A.I. is an existential requirement of institutions of higher education.\u201cIn a world that promises to be defined by A.I., universities that fail to produce graduates who can use it productively will consign themselves to irrelevance,\u201d she wrote recently.Harvard\u2019s president, Alan Garber, said in public remarks this month that A.I.-backed research is on the cusp of a boom that may drive the pace of knowledge faster than at any other time in human history. Dr. Garber has said that researchers in many fields are now unlikely to be at the leading edge of their disciplines without A.I.AdvertisementSKIP ADVERTISEMENTImageHarvard\u2019s president, Alan Garber, said recently that researchers will need to use A.I. in many disciplines.Credit...Sophie Park for The New York TimesOhio State is integrating A.I. into every major, with the expectation that every student will be fluent in their field of study by graduation. The university has directed every department and major \u2014 from business and engineering, to English and veterinary medicine \u2014 to train students on how to use A.I. in their respective fields, and when not to.\u201cWhat is OK to offload to A.I., and what is not?\u201d Ohio State\u2019s president, Ravi V. Bellamkonda, said in an interview in July. \u201cThe answer to that depends on the field and depends on your stage of learning.\u201dElizabeth Kiss, the president of Union College, said universities have to educate students on both the thoughtful use of A.I. and on the things A.I. doesn\u2019t do, such as \u201clead teams, push the boundaries of knowledge.\u201dStill, Some Schools Are Creating BoundariesThe University of Chicago has banned A.I. in certain required social sciences courses, while the university\u2019s law school banned phones, tablets and laptops in first-year classrooms. The university is one of a handful that recently adopted new academic integrity rules.AdvertisementSKIP ADVERTISEMENTThe law school at the University of California, Berkeley, adopted a policy forbidding the use of A.I. \u201cto conceptualize, outline, draft, revise, and edit\u201d work submitted for credit.Cornell University has created a disciplinary process meant to correct A.I. cheating while avoiding black marks on students\u2019 records. Now, students accused of minor misuse will be allowed to accept responsibility and complete a workshop and some reflective work.ImageSome courses at the University of Chicago ban A.I. use.Credit...Jamie Kelter Davis for The New York TimesSteve Jackson, the vice provost for academic innovation, said the program would not be used for plainly egregious misconduct. \u201cThis is a chance to sanction something, catch it, not let it go unnoted or to let it pass,\u201d he added.Like many institutions, Harvard does not have a central set of A.I. rules. David Deming, dean of Harvard College, wrote in a note to students arriving for the fall semester that he favors more A.I. where \u201cit can deepen learning,\u201d but that the school was also looking to A.I.-proof some assignments.AdvertisementSKIP ADVERTISEMENTThat would mean more in-class tests, said Dean Deming, and fewer take-home assignments, where the temptation to cheat is powerful. He said he intends to produce a set of guidelines for A.I. use at the college by the end of the academic year.For younger students, some school districts are proceeding cautiously. Earlier this month, the nation\u2019s largest school district, in New York City, vastly limited student A.I. use in grades K-8, while the second-largest district, in Los Angeles, essentially banned student use of chatbots at every grade level.Policing A.I. Use Is Hit or MissStudents are often navigating this landscape without clear guidance from their colleges.Most institutions leave it up to individual instructors \u2014 who may have little experience with A.I. \u2014 to set rules on how the technology is used in each class.It may seem clear that submitting chatbot-generated text is cheating, while using a chatbot to revise one\u2019s own writing is allowed. But the line between those two capabilities is thin, and much A.I. use lies in an ethical gray zone.Many educators \u201cdon\u2019t even know where to start,\u201d said Annie Chechitelli, chief product officer at TurnItIn, a company that makes software that can detect plagiarism and track and guide A.I use. \u201cWhat is OK? What\u2019s not OK?\u201dAdvertisementSKIP ADVERTISEMENTMany instructors have already moved to on-paper assignments in the classroom, or locked-down computer browsers that limit A.I. misuse. Others report success in using A.I. detection software, which has recently improved in its ability to flag chatbot-written text while avoiding false positives.Some see A.I. as a crucial partner for thinking and writing and put few limits on how students use the technology. Others subscribe to the notion of \u201cA.I. literacy,\u201d assigning students to use chatbots to produce an essay or poem, for example, and then critique and try to improve the output.In Australia, the University of Sydney has adopted the \u201ctwo-lane approach,\u201d seen as a global model. Across disciplines, students must complete some assessments in person, under secure conditions meant to restrict A.I. But other assignments must use A.I., to help familiarize students with the technology that is reshaping the economy.\u201cIt\u2019s almost like sex ed,\u201d said Anita Sarma, a professor of computer science at Oregon State who has studied the impact of A.I. on student cognition. \u201cThey will do it anyway,\u201d she said. \u201cHow do we teach them responsible use?\u201dAdvertisementSKIP ADVERTISEMENT",
    "published_at": "2026-09-15T09:03:20+00:00",
    "author_name": "Mark Arsenault, Dana Goldstein, Alan Blinder, Sarah Mervosh",
    "site_name": "The New York Times",
    "section": "US",
    "publisher": "The New York Times Company",
    "ai_headline": "An M.I.T. Report Warns A.I. Is Causing \u2018Cognitive Surrender.\u2019 Universities Are in a Bind.",
    "ai_simplified_title": "MIT Report Warns AI Causes Cognitive Surrender, Universities Divided",
    "ai_excerpt": "A recent M.I.T. report warns that A.I. is causing \"cognitive surrender\" among students, leading to isolation and an \"illusion of learning.\" Universities are grappling with how to respond, with some embracing A.I. for relevance while others express skepticism and set boundaries.",
    "ai_subject_tags": [
        "Artificial Intelligence",
        "Higher Education",
        "Student Learning",
        "Academic Integrity",
        "Technology Impact"
    ],
    "ai_context_type": "News",
    "ai_context_details": {
        "tone": "informative",
        "perspective": "neutral",
        "audience": "general",
        "credibility_indicators": [
            "expert_quotes",
            "data_cited",
            "institutional_reports"
        ]
    },
    "ai_source_vector": null,
    "ai_confidence_score": 0.9999999999999999,
    "ai_extraction_metadata": {
        "extracted_at": "2026-09-18T17:00:35.614509Z",
        "ai_model": "gemini-2.5-flash",
        "extraction_method": "automated",
        "content_length": 10576,
        "metadata_prompt_body_chars": 10576,
        "metadata_prompt_truncated": false,
        "url": "https:\/\/nytimes.com\/2026\/09\/15\/us\/universities-ai-warnings-enthusiasm.html",
        "existing_metadata": {
            "author_name": null,
            "published_at": null,
            "domain_name": "nytimes.com",
            "site_name": null,
            "section": null,
            "publisher": null
        },
        "openai_refusal_gemini_fallback": false
    }
}

{
    "extracted_at": "2026-09-18T17:00:35.614509Z",
    "ai_model": "gemini-2.5-flash",
    "extraction_method": "automated",
    "content_length": 10576,
    "metadata_prompt_body_chars": 10576,
    "metadata_prompt_truncated": false,
    "url": "https:\/\/nytimes.com\/2026\/09\/15\/us\/universities-ai-warnings-enthusiasm.html",
    "existing_metadata": {
        "author_name": null,
        "published_at": null,
        "domain_name": "nytimes.com",
        "site_name": null,
        "section": null,
        "publisher": null
    },
    "openai_refusal_gemini_fallback": false
}