Across PHS, the use of artificial
intelligence (AI) tools such as ChatGPT
to assist students with school assignments
has become an increasing trend, raising
concerns about the future of academic
integrity at PHS.

While some argue these tools are simply
new forms of study aids, others are raising
concerns regarding AI being used as a
gateway to academic dishonesty. The rise
of AI has made cheating easier than ever
in a modernizing digital environment,
where a few keystrokes can generate
essays, solve math problems, and even
mimic human thought. At PHS, AI
chatbots have sparked concerns among
teachers, administrators, and student
leaders, who are actively collaborating
to discover new methods and policy
changes to uphold academic integrity in
an increasingly tech-savvy world.

“[AI is] a fast developing technology;
our policy, our adaptation to it, how we
manage our student expectations, [and]
how we teach in [the] AI era, needs to
continue to be evaluated and monitored
... perhaps regulated as well,” said PHS
Principal Cecilia Birge.

There is a significant concern that
violations of the AI policy may become
progressively challenging for teachers
to regulate as technology
continues to advance and
become more accessible.
The challenge lies more in
addressing how these tools
impact student engagement
and education rather
than simply identifying
AI-generated content. As a result,
many teachers have developed various
techniques to tackle this growing issue,
such as the usage of AI checker softwares
or monitoring the editing history to
prevent students from entirely relying on
AI to complete their assignments.

“We have students submit assignments
to Turnitin.com, but I also check,” said AP
Language and Composition and English II
teacher John Bathke. “[Students] give me
editing permission on Google Docs and a
lot of [assignments] are written in class.”

But teachers aren’t the only ones
concerned about AI — student leadership
representatives have also voiced their
worries about its misuse. In November,
Board of Education Student Liaisons
Nikolai Margulis ’25 and Maya Hagt
’25 addressed the Board of Education,
highlighting instances of students
violating the district’s AI policy. Since
then, the administration has been actively
discussing ways to strengthen policies,
ensuring that PHS not only keeps up
with rapidly evolving technology but
also upholds its commitment to fostering
safe and effective AI usage that enhances
individual learning.

 “We can’t completely keep kids from
cheating,” said Margulis. “Teachers can
make rules for cheating ... [but] it’s hard
to enforce those rules unless the student
body is committed to it and believes it
from an ideological standpoint. I think
that’s really important [to] ingrain it in
our school culture not to cheat.”

With AI usage often overlapping with
academic dishonesty, educators believe an
overreliance on AI tools can stifle critical
thinking and problem-solving skills, as
students may feel empowered to skip the
deeper analytical thinking in favor of the
quick, easily presented AI responses. This
not only impacts their ability to absorb
and apply knowledge but
also creates gaps in skills
that are crucial for success
in both future academic
and professional settings.

“Using [AI] to complete
entire assignments [will]
hurt you in the long
run. If I plagiarize all my stuff, then I’m
not actually doing the learning that is
required for me to actually [understand]
the information, which ultimately [will
hurt me] when I get to the real world and
[have] a job, since I haven’t learned that
skill,” said Bathke.

The environment students are in
is believed to also play a large role in
shaping how students use these tools.
If classrooms foster collaboration,
curiosity, and accountability, students
may feel more encouraged to engage
with the learning process authentically.
However, in more cutthroat, competitive
environments, students may see it
necessary to unethically use AI tools
as a means to gain an edge, prioritizing
outcome over learning.

“We live in a very competitive learning
environment, society as well. An
unhealthy part of our building culture
is this toxic competitiveness of grades.
So there’s that simple-minded focus on
grades that makes some of our students
make bad choices,” said Birge. “But when
your grades are not truly reflective of your
mastery, eventually it will catch up with
you. It happens all the time in life.”

However, many teachers do not view
the existence of AI tools as the issue, but
rather how they are used. When used
thoughtfully, AI has the potential to
support learning by offering explanations,
generating ideas, and providing assistance
that encourages deeper understanding.

“There [are] significant benefits that
AI brings, especially when it comes to
equity issues. If I speak English as a second
language learner, I can say something in
[English in] an okay manner, but if I ask
AI to help me with certain content and
language and grammar, that’s learning.
That’s a positive thing,” said Birge.

Many educators believe that the key
is balancing the positives and negatives
of AI,which involves teaching students
to use these tools responsibly, as an
additional source of learning rather than
a replacement for completing their own
work.

“AI is like a compass — it can point
you in the right direction, but [real
learning happens] when you put in the
work yourself and make the most of the
tools around you to learn,” said computer
science teacher Edward Yin. “AI can be
integrated into education when used
thoughtfully and responsibly ... but it’s
up to students to use it as a learning
tool, not for shortcuts. As [educators],
we must [create environments] where
students don’t feel like cheating, but
rather [learning]."

PHS Investigates: academic integrity

Following the resignation of
Carol Kelley on October 30 of
last year, the Board of Education
began the process of finding a
new, permanent superintendent
for Princeton Public Schools.
With interim superintendent
Dr. Kathie Foster’s contract set
to expire on July 1, 2025, the
Board aims to make a decision
before then.

To facilitate the search
process, the district hired
School Leadership LLC, a search
consultant firm based in New
York. As lead consultants on the
search, Dr. Marty Brooks and
Rina Beder are responsible for
advertising the job posting and
recruiting candidates who fit the
profile and specifications sought
by the district. These candidates
would then be reviewed and
interviewed by all ten members
of the new Board formed after
the election on November 5 for
a final decision.

Before recruiting potential
candidates and during the
information gathering stage
of the search process, Brooks
and Beder sought input from
Princeton community members
regarding the ideal qualities of
a new superintendent. From
September 30 to October 10,
they conducted a total of 18
in-person sessions, including
one with PHS students, and six
virtual forums with groups like
the Princeton Parents for Black
Children and the Parents Special
Ed Union Leadership, and a
group of three district unions
representing faculty and staff.
The consultants also made use
of an online survey in which 500
community members responded.

“We were really impressed
with the openness and honesty
of everybody that [we] met with.
There’s a deep commitment to
the district’s schools, and that
came through loud and clear,”
said Brooks.

Through the forums, they saw
recurring patterns in the needs of
the community.
Brooks and Beder
then compiled these needs
and feedback for the new
superintendent into six key
specifications. The qualifications,
as per the School Leadership
LLC’s Specification Development
Report, were categorized as
follows: an experienced teacher
with a strong commitment to the
needs of students, a compassionate
promoter of Princeton Public’s
Schools’ mission, a collaborator
who creates strong relationships
with the community, an effective
communicator who readily
shares and exchanges ideas,
a skilled financial manager
who can maximize the board’s
resources, and a visionary who
plans to lead the community to
a higher level of excellence.
These qualities were assembled
into a draft of the profile for the
job sent to the Board of Education
and approved on October 16. The
2024 Princeton Public Schools
Superintendent job description
reflected the community’s input,
and the LLC started recruiting on
October 17.

In particular, the last
specification in the board’s final
job profile describing a “leader
who is excited about becoming
a member of the Princeton
community” was designed to
promote greater stability, given
the high turnover the district has
seen recently in superintendent
and principal positions.

“There has been a lot of change,
so we’re looking for somebody
who is committed not only
to staying for some period of
time but also embedding him
or herself in the community —
somebody who really loves the
place, wants to sink his or her
roots there, and wants to commit
… for the work that needs to be
done as well,” said Brooks.

The Board will conduct a
rolling search, so as the LLC
pre-interviews candidates, it
will continually send specific
individuals who meet the
superintendent profile to the
Board to interview for the
position. Ideally, the Board hopes
to have a candidate by early 2025
since Foster’s contract requires
PPS to give her a 90 day notice
that a new superintendent will
fill her position.

“[Dr. Foster’s contract
requirements] would take [the
Board] back to March [to find
a superintendent]. And in [NJ],
we have an additional step: the
executive county superintendent
has to approve a superintendent’s
contract. So the ideal timing [to
hire someone] would be that the
board announces in January or
February or even early March that
there is a successful candidate,”
said Betsy Baglio, vice president
of the Board of Education and
chair of the superintendent
search committee.

However, the Board cannot
announce a successful candidate
until after the school board
election on November 5, so
actual voting on a superintendent
cannot happen until 2025.
Despite these challenges, the
July 1 deadline will not deter the
Board from selecting the best
possible candidate for Princeton
Public Schools.

“We are going to make sure
that whoever we choose meets
the criteria we’re looking for. So
if we don’t have someone by July
1, as we get closer to that date,
we’ll have contingencies in place.
There has to be a superintendent
on July 1 ... but if not, there will be
someone in that role,” said Dafna
Kendal, president of the Board of
the Education.

The Tower

Princeton Public's Work

The Tower