AI is widespread in higher ed, but is it helping or hurting student learning? – NBC Boston

Report on the Integration of Artificial Intelligence in Higher Education and its Implications for Sustainable Development Goals

1.0 Executive Summary: A Challenge to SDG 4 (Quality Education)

An incident at Northeastern University has brought to the forefront the critical challenges that Artificial Intelligence (AI) poses to the integrity of higher education, directly impacting the fulfillment of Sustainable Development Goal 4 (SDG 4), which aims to ensure inclusive and equitable quality education. A student’s discovery of an adjunct professor’s reliance on AI-generated materials for course content has ignited a national debate on educational quality, institutional accountability, and the ethical integration of technology in academia.

1.1 The Northeastern University Case Study

• In February, student Ella Stapleton identified that her organizational behavior course notes were incomprehensible and largely generated by ChatGPT, as evidenced by accidental copy-pastes of AI prompts and disclaimers within the documents.
• Stapleton contended that this practice fundamentally undermined the quality of education for which she and her classmates had paid significant tuition, filing a formal complaint and requesting a refund.
• This case highlights a potential conflict with SDG 4, where the use of AI as a shortcut by overworked faculty may degrade the quality of teaching and learning, rather than enhance it. Stapleton’s argument was that the “transfer of knowledge” was faulty, a core tenet of quality education.

2.0 Institutional Responses and Alignment with SDGs

Higher education institutions are responding to the proliferation of AI by developing new academic programs and ethical guidelines. These efforts align with multiple SDGs, including SDG 4 (Quality Education), SDG 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth), and SDG 9 (Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure).

2.1 Proactive Curriculum Development for SDG 8 and SDG 9

Universities are creating specialized AI programs to prepare students for the future workforce, contributing to economic growth and innovation.

1. Rivier University: Offers a Bachelor of Science in AI, preparing students for a high-demand field with a median salary of approximately $145,000. This directly supports SDG 8 by equipping students with skills for productive employment and decent work.
2. Regional Trend: Master’s programs in AI are emerging at institutions like Northeastern University and Boston University, indicating a broader commitment to fostering innovation in line with SDG 9.

2.2 Development of Ethical Frameworks for SDG 16 (Peace, Justice, and Strong Institutions)

In response to student usage and ethical concerns, some universities are establishing training and policies to promote responsible AI integration.

• Boston University: Provides a self-paced online course, “AI at BU,” which focuses on the fundamentals of AI, responsible use, and university policies. This initiative aims to build effective, accountable, and transparent institutions as called for in SDG 16.
• Policy Gap: Despite these efforts, a significant governance gap exists. A 2024 EDUCAUSE survey noted that 73% of institutional AI planning is reactive to student use, while data from Inside Higher Ed indicates that only 20% of colleges have published formal policies on AI, highlighting a systemic challenge to institutional strength (SDG 16).

3.0 Research on AI’s Cognitive Impact and its Threat to SDG 4 Targets

Recent research investigates the effect of AI on students’ cognitive abilities, raising concerns that over-reliance on these tools may undermine a key objective of SDG 4: the development of critical thinking skills.

3.1 MIT Media Lab Study Findings

A study conducted by the MIT Media Lab explored how AI assistance affects the cognitive engagement of students during an essay-writing task.

1. Methodology: The study involved three groups of students: one using AI, one using non-AI search engines, and a control group with no external tools. Brain activity was monitored to measure cognitive effort.
2. Cognitive Cost: The study concluded that the convenience of AI came at a “cognitive cost,” as the ability of participants to critically evaluate the AI-generated content was diminished.
3. Reduced Ownership: Students in the AI-assisted group reported feeling detached from their work and demonstrated less ownership over the final product.
4. Implications for SDG 4: Researcher Nataliya Kos’myna expressed concern that the widespread implementation of AI in education could negatively impact human cognition. These findings suggest that unchecked AI use could hinder the development of essential skills necessary for lifelong learning, a core target of SDG 4.

4.0 Conclusion: Institutional Accountability and the Future of Quality Education

The resolution of the Northeastern University case, where the student’s refund request was denied but the professor was put “on notice,” underscores the ongoing struggle for institutional accountability. While Northeastern University states it “embraces the responsible use of artificial intelligence,” the incident reported by Ella Stapleton serves as a critical lesson for higher education worldwide.

To uphold the promise of SDG 4, institutions must move beyond reactive measures and establish clear, robust policies that ensure AI is used as a tool to support—not replace—the fundamental process of teaching and critical thinking. The challenge lies in harnessing the innovative potential of AI (SDG 9) to create a skilled workforce (SDG 8) without sacrificing the quality and cognitive development central to SDG 4.

Analysis of Sustainable Development Goals in the Article

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

The article highlights several issues related to the integration of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in higher education, which directly and indirectly connect to multiple Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The primary SDGs addressed are:

• SDG 4: Quality Education: This is the most prominent SDG in the article. The entire narrative revolves around the quality of university education, the development of new skills for the future, ethical considerations in learning, and ensuring educational institutions provide value for tuition fees. The case of Ella Stapleton, who complained about AI-generated, “incomprehensible” notes, directly questions the quality of teaching and learning.
• SDG 8: Decent Work and Economic Growth: The article connects education to future employment and economic outcomes. It discusses the creation of new degree programs in AI, such as the one at Rivier University, which prepares students for a “field with a median salary of roughly $145,000.” This aligns with the goal of promoting productive employment and decent work.
• SDG 9: Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure: The article focuses on a major technological innovation (AI) and how society, particularly the educational sector, is adapting. It covers the development of new academic programs and research, like the MIT Media Lab study, which enhances scientific research and upgrades technological capabilities by creating a skilled workforce.
• SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions: The article touches upon the need for effective and accountable institutions. Ella Stapleton’s formal complaint against Northeastern University and the slow institutional response, along with the finding that “Only 20% of colleges and universities have published policies regarding AI use,” point to challenges in institutional governance, transparency, and accountability in the face of new technology.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

Based on the issues discussed, several specific SDG targets can be identified:

1. Under SDG 4 (Quality Education):
   • Target 4.3: By 2030, ensure equal access for all women and men to affordable and quality technical, vocational and tertiary education, including university. The article questions the quality of education received in exchange for high tuition fees, as exemplified by Ella Stapleton’s statement, “If I buy something for $8,000 and it’s faulty, I should get a refund.”
   • Target 4.4: By 2030, substantially increase the number of youth and adults who have relevant skills, including technical and vocational skills, for employment, decent jobs and entrepreneurship. The creation of new Bachelor’s and Master’s degree programs in AI at universities like Rivier, Northeastern, and Boston University is a direct response to the need for skills in a new, high-demand field.
   • Target 4.7: By 2030, ensure that all learners acquire the knowledge and skills needed to promote sustainable development… The concern over AI’s impact on “students’ critical thinking skills” and the MIT study investigating this cognitive cost relate to ensuring education develops essential skills beyond rote learning.
2. Under SDG 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth):
   • Target 8.2: Achieve higher levels of economic productivity through diversification, technological upgrading and innovation. The article’s focus on AI as a transformative technology and the educational system’s role in preparing students to work in this “dynamic field” directly supports this target.
3. Under SDG 9 (Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure):
   • Target 9.5: Enhance scientific research, upgrade the technological capabilities of industrial sectors… and encourage innovation. The MIT Media Lab’s study on AI’s effect on human cognition is an example of enhancing scientific research. Furthermore, universities creating AI degree programs are building the human capital needed to drive innovation.
4. Under SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions):
   • Target 16.6: Develop effective, accountable and transparent institutions at all levels. The article highlights a lack of institutional preparedness, stating that “colleges are slow to develop new policies” on AI. The fact that only 20% of institutions have published policies indicates a gap in creating accountable and transparent frameworks for new technologies.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

The article contains several explicit and implicit indicators that can be used to measure progress:

• For Target 4.3 (Quality and Affordable Education):
  • Indicator (Implied): Student satisfaction with educational quality. Ella Stapleton’s formal complaint and demand for a tuition refund serve as a qualitative indicator of dissatisfaction with the quality of teaching.
  • Indicator (Explicit): Cost of tertiary education. The article mentions specific costs like “$8,000” for a single class and “almost $40,000 for a bachelor’s degree,” which are direct data points for measuring affordability.
• For Target 4.4 (Relevant Skills for Employment):
  • Indicator (Explicit): Number of tertiary education programs focused on new technologies. The article explicitly mentions the creation of “a Bachelor of Science degree in artificial intelligence being offered at Rivier University” and Master’s programs at several other universities.
  • Indicator (Explicit): Median salary of graduates in high-tech fields. The article states that the AI field has a “median salary of roughly $145,000,” which measures the economic value of the skills being taught.
• For Target 4.7 (Acquisition of Knowledge and Skills):
  • Indicator (Implied): Assessment of critical thinking skills. The MIT study that recorded participants’ brain activity and found that AI use came at a “cognitive cost” is a direct attempt to measure and create an indicator for critical thinking engagement.
• For Target 16.6 (Effective and Accountable Institutions):
  • Indicator (Explicit): Proportion of institutions with published policies on emerging issues. The statistic that “Only 20% of colleges and universities have published policies regarding AI use” is a direct quantitative indicator of institutional responsiveness and accountability.

4. Summary Table of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: nbcboston.com