On Wednesday, the University announced in an email sent to all faculty and staff that they would be providing all students, faculty, and staff access to ChatGPT Plus or Pro. Students and faculty who spoke with The Daily Princetonian are divided over the University’s decision, with some expressing concerns around academic integrity and others viewing the decision as keeping pace with rapid technological change.
The one-year pilot program with OpenAI will allow students to request access to ChatGPT Plus in January, before the spring semester starts. Faculty and staff were able to request access starting Wednesday.
Before accessing their ChatGPT Plus accounts, students will be required to complete an online Foundations of AI Literacy course, according to the Office of Information Technology’s FAQ page.
The University’s contract with OpenAI is intended to provide “enhanced data security and privacy protections” and cost savings for the University, according to a statement from University spokesperson Michael Hotchkiss.
“We recognize the use of AI as a powerful, modern tool for research and learning,” Hotchkiss wrote. “This does not mean that we actively endorse its use for any particular purpose in any circumstance, any more than we would approve of a specific use of a particular website or app by providing wireless access.”
Beyond select members of the Princeton community, students and faculty at large appear to have not been consulted or informed in advance of Wednesday about the pilot program. Multiple faculty members whom The Daily Princetonian contacted were unaware of the decision before the faculty and staff-wide email and said they were taken aback.
“A number of faculty were consulted about this pilot and its implementation, some of whom have expertise in AI and others who are thinking about its use in research and teaching across disciplines,” Hotchkiss added. “We are planning additional opportunities for faculty feedback prior to the rollout to students.”
Undergraduate Student Government Academics Chair Isaac Bernstein ’28 told the ‘Prince’ that he had conversations with faculty and members of the University administration earlier this semester about the implementation of the program.
Support nonprofit student journalism. Donate to the ‘Prince.’ Donate now »
“My part in terms of this process is to ensure student accessibility, access, and equity, and to represent student voices such that those three pillars, in this situation, are met,” Bernstein said, pointing to how students have had varying levels of access to both free and paid AI models.
Currently, Princeton provides a limited number of approved AI tools accessible through Princeton University logins, such as Adobe Creative Cloud Image Generation and the basic Microsoft 365 Copilot Chat at no cost for students, faculty, and staff.
Other tools that are available to faculty, with varying monthly and annual rates, include Anthropic’s Claude, Microsoft’s 365 Copilot Premium, and Google’s Gemini Workspace+.
Student response to the University’s decision remained mixed. Some students raised concerns that academic dishonesty may become more prevalent for students with access to ChatGPT Plus.
The decision to provide ChatGPT Plus accounts “feels like handing Princeton students an academic shortcut,” Krystal Ma ’30 told the ‘Prince.’
Bernstein pushed back on these concerns, noting that “the addendum to include such a resource does not affect academic integrity in the sense that it’s supporting equity, opportunity, and access, and many students already have” access to the tools.
Get the best of the ‘Prince’ delivered to your doorstep or inbox. Subscribe now »
Students noted that access to ChatGPT Plus allows students to save money. “I think [the pilot is] a good idea because it reduces student costs,” George Dennis ’30 stated. Dennis noted that there was no way to prevent students who already “abuse” ChatGPT from using it to complete their homework rather than as a learning tool. “The people who are going to use it for the things they should, they’re going to get it for free,” Dennis told the ‘Prince.’
“In light of recent events, there can remain no doubt about the incredible potential of AI in accelerating research and the pursuit of knowledge, particularly in mathematical fields,” Heitor Borges GS wrote in a statement to the ‘Prince.’ Borges, a second-year Ph.D. student in economics, added that the University “does well to ensure that its students and researchers are equipped to deal with this changing world, and this is quite independent of whether we approve of these changes.”
Some students had an optimistic attitude toward the University’s decision, citing the prevalence of AI tools. According to the ‘Prince’ 2030 Frosh Survey, nearly 90 percent of students surveyed have used ChatGPT or another AI model.
“I think [the pilot is] great. I think ChatGPT is going to be a part of our future for sure, and chatbots in general,” Ammar Omar ’30 said. “I think it’s good that the University is exposing students to it, so that we can learn how to use it well to aid in our learning rather than having it be this banned tool that we’re fighting against the University to use.”
Multiple students expressed that they appreciated the pilot program as other peer institutions already offer equivalent AI tools. Last spring, Harvard’s Faculty of Arts and Sciences made Claude available to affiliates and phased out ChatGPT Edu due to low student usage. At Yale, anyone with a Yale email has free access to Clarity, an AI chatbot powered by OpenAI.
“I know a lot of schools are doing it, so I guess it’s about time that we also get it,” Mabel Li ’28 said. “I want the student experience. I want the student discount.”
“Honestly, when I first got to Princeton, I kind of already thought they had that because I know other schools have like a free ChatGPT setup,” Nojaye Talebzadeh ’30 said. “So honestly, I’m not too surprised. I guess I’m questioning why now? What sparked it?”
Amid growing use of AI, many classrooms have been rethinking assignment formats. “Most classes’ policies are anti-AI, so I don’t understand the point of it,” Ma told the ‘Prince.’
History professor Kevin Kruse strongly criticized the University’s “rush to embrace generative AI,” arguing that AI undermines humanities instruction in the classroom and skills like writing and historical analysis. “In a field like mine, where the entire goal of innovative scholarship is to find new ideas that break with the conventional wisdom, the great averager of ChatGPT is completely counterproductive,” he wrote in a statement to the ‘Prince.’
Support nonprofit student journalism. Donate to the ‘Prince.’ Donate now »
“Most important, it’s a threat to the innovative and exceptional teaching that Princeton has long taken pride in,” Kruse wrote.
Kruse added that the decision is “a waste of resources at a time when we’re cancelling worthwhile programs like Outdoor Action and cutting back on faculty hires. It’s a threat to the environment, given the water consumption and electrical costs of data centers, which seems counterproductive to the excellent work the University has done on sustainability in the past decade or so.”
“I would have rather gotten access to a tool that detects AI use like Pangram,” neuroscience professor Sam Wang wrote in a text message to the ‘Prince.’
Get the best of the ‘Prince’ delivered to your doorstep or inbox. Subscribe now »
Others acknowledged the potential for AI to be used irresponsibly, but also pointed to differences in AI access among students and security and data vulnerabilities that the new program could help alleviate.
“Princeton, I do not believe, endorses the use of AI in any way, shape, or form outside of what each individual faculty member requires for their classes,” Meredith Martin, an English professor and the founding director of the Center for Digital Humanities at Princeton, told the ‘Prince.’ “And that part, I think, is really important — that this is not in any way saying we encourage it.”
Mia Chen is a News contributor for the ‘Prince’ and a member of the Class of 2030.
Sena Chang is a staff Features writer and the associate News editor for the ‘Prince’ leading investigations. She is from Japan and South Korea, and she often covers local politics and student life. She can be reached at sena[at]dailyprincetonian.com.
Please send any corrections to corrections[at]dailyprincetonian.com.