The calculator traces a path of educational integration that AI can follow. In essence, AI is an advanced and more powerful version of the calculator that can be applied to a wider range of fields. The power of AI is strikingly clear in the “real world,” proving its worth of integration into education. Admittedly, the dangers of AI, especially in regards to critical thinking, are far more sophisticated. Compared to the calculator, curricula would need significantly more adaptation to integrate into curricula. Yet the promise is there. Dean of the Stanford Graduate School of Education Dan Schwartz said that the “technology is a game-changer for education… and it fundamentally creates new ways of learning.”

Instead, Deerfield has chosen the opposite path to integrating AI into education, embarking on an institution-wide crusade against its use. The updated student handbook now outlines the following policy regarding AI: “Students are prohibited from using AI-generative tools for student work (including AI editing services) unless under direct instruction from faculty to do so. If a teacher explicitly allows students to use AI, students must cite this and include all prompts they used in their process or submitted product.” In practice, this policy has driven teachers to discuss the existence of AI when planning their curriculum. As a result, Deerfield exists as a quarantined bubble, falling behind in a world where AI use is increasingly prevalent.

The greatest problem this quarantine poses is that education at Deerfield operates as if AI doesn’t exist. In a world where AI is increasingly omnipresent, applied to varying degrees in practically every industry or profession, a rift between the education we receive at Deerfield and our future beyond our four years here begins to emerge. Going back to Dr. Houston’s analogy, instead of learning how to use an electric drill to install nails, the Deerfield administration and curriculum acts as if the tool was never invented, disallowing students from using it because of its possible danger of doing the critical thinking students are meant to do.

AI doesn’t need to be implemented everywhere, especially less so in subjects such as English and History where writing and critical thinking are developed, which AI might interfere with. But there are definitely areas where it can be applied. Take the example of “Physics 2,” an investigation-based class where basic coding is used to model physical phenomena. Reflecting the practices employed in academia or companies, the course could implement an AI-based component and in larger-scale data analysis, an area where computer intelligence far exceeds human capabilities. In addition to this philosophy course, “Ethics of Artificial Intelligence,” which approaches the topic of AI from a rather distant, analytical perspective, the Deerfield Computer Science Department could implement an introductory course that discusses the science and math that powers generative models. AI could also be implemented in certain history courses to aid in research and source collection; JSTOR introduced a new beta feature that provides AI-generated summaries and further recommendations to streamline the often tedious research process.

While the use of AI isn’t necessary in any of the examples mentioned above, such an implementation would ensure that our Deerfield education adequately prepares us for the world we will graduate into, teaching us when and how to harness the power of AI. Using AI doesn’t only refer to asking ChatGPT for an essay draft, which, although possible, shouldn’t be the reason that the school takes such a reactionary approach.

The Deerfield website advertises that “the Academy prepares students for leadership in a rapidly changing world that requires global understanding.” But through restrictive policies against AI, our education moves further and further away from achieving a global understanding. Justin Ahn ’24, our beloved late Co-managing Editor, in his last Scroll article argued that Deerfield should strive to be the shining city on the hill. But if Deerfield wishes to be that city, it cannot afford to wall itself in with LED lights?