EIU student government passes resolution on AI use by faculty.

Speaker of the EIU student senate Megan Fox reads out public comment submitted online during the senate meeting on Wednesday in the Arcola-Tuscola room of the Martin Luther King Jr student union. 

The Eastern Illinois University Student Senate unanimously passed a resolution calling for the administration to regulate faculty’s use of artificial intelligence at its meeting on Wednesday.  

The resolution cited recent student concern around the use of AI by faculty in the classroom, including a petition whose online version has 512 signatures.  

Speaker of the Senate Megan Fox said she would send the resolution to upper administration.  

“I am calling specifically upon President Gatrell and Provost Farley to create either an IGP or some sort of policy that regulates what professors can and cannnot use AI for as a baseline across campus,” she said.  

Earlier on Wednesday morning, Gatrell sent an email to all EIU students pertaining to AI.  

“AI is a powerful tool that has the potential to enhance the student experience by supporting our work in the classroom, enhancing learning, and accelerating creativity,” he wrote.  

Gatrell also touched on organizations using AI for marketing, which has created inconsistency.  

“EIU’s consistent identity is more critical today than ever. The rise of "no-click" and "no-search" platforms are shaping the college choices of our future students as we speak," he wrote. "They are also highly aware of AI-generated scams, spam, and misleading content, which means materials that appear artificial can unintentionally undermine credibility rather than strengthen it." 

Student Body President Mason Tegeler said he reread the email during the meeting and saw the section on branding was longer than the section on learning.  

Tegeler said he agreed the use of AI flyers was bad but said it wasn’t the biggest issue.  

“The bigger issue is the total degradation of academic integrity at this university right now,” he said.  

Gatrell's email also said he wants faculty leaders and academic departments to create their own guidelines on AI usage. 

“This guidance will certainly vary across departments and programs and will likely change over time as new technologies emerge and professional societies develop more formal AI frameworks,” he wrote. 

Tegeler said this idea wouldn't work because those who aren't using AI would be the ones making the guidelines as opposed to those using AI. 

Fox said department-specific regulations put students in a bad spot due to the vast differences there would be. 

“There’s going to be students who suffer because their department is very pro-AI usage in the classroom and there’s going to be other students who don’t," she said. "That’s not equitable." 

Gatrell in an email said due to the differences in fields that it would lead to differnt AI usage.

“Given the importance and centrality of academic freedom to our mission and the concept of shared governance, this discussion is very complex.  Moreover, I earnestly believe it is essential that any guidance reflects the values and expectations of disciplines and professions. As such, I would fully expect that different disciplinary and professional perspectives on AI will emerge—and that’s fully consistent with academic freedom,” he wrote.

Gatrell said current internal policy will focus on data.

“The current IGP in development focuses primarily on data privacy and compliance with federal and state laws, as well as providing a framework for AI software purchases and approved tools,” he wrote.

Fox said Jay's email didn’t address student concerns.  

“I really do think that the email today was a slap in the face for what we’ve been advocating for several weeks now,” she said. “Nobody cares. That's what it feels like." 

History major Elly Osborn, a cosponsor of the resolution, was the only in-person speaker during the senate’s public comment section. 

She said she didn’t plan to come until Gatrell’s email.  

“I felt that email came off as petty and inconsiderate and also felt like it silenced the voices of the 512 people who signed the AI petition,” she said.  

Executive Vice President Sam Erwin said the use of AI in the education department changed his thoughts. 

“I was very proud of being an education major in 2023. I don’t know if I can say that now,” he said.  

Erwin brought up the English department and its staunch anti-AI stance.  

“Often we hear that in the English department that we are miles ahead of the people in practicum and that’s because they have to experience the full front of AI within their departments,” he said. “It’s really upsetting because Eastern always promotes that we’re a teaching school.” 

Senator Taylor Ehret said AI’s impacts have been felt by many English assignments going analog, which she said slows down the class and creates more work.  

“It just feels a bit antithetical to the writing process even though I understand why we have to do it,” she said. 

Student Vice President of Student Affairs Valarie Harmon said the use of AI isn't good for any major.  

“It’s quite literarily a disgrace to whatever major you are,” she said. “This should not be something we promote. We should promote critical thinking.”