AI as an Ally, Not a Replacement: Student Groups at Brown University Set Boundaries
AI as an Ally, Not a Replacement: Student Groups at Brown University Set Boundaries
At Brown University, conversations about artificial intelligence are no longer confined to classrooms. Student organizations are now actively shaping their own policies, seeking to balance innovation with academic integrity as AI tools become more accessible.
Two prominent groups — the Brown Undergraduate Law Review (BULR) and the Collegiate Consulting Group (CCG) — are leading this effort, each adopting a philosophy that encourages AI as a support tool rather than a substitute for original thinking.
For BULR, a student-run legal publication, preserving authentic scholarship is a top priority. Editor-in-Chief Daniella Goldrich emphasized that while AI can assist in limited ways, full reliance on it undermines the integrity of legal writing. The organization now requires contributors to disclose any AI use, especially when it impacts the originality of their work. Their podcast team, led by Justin Khan, has gone further by restricting AI to research support only, prohibiting its use in scripting and interview preparation to maintain credibility in public-facing content.
Despite these safeguards, instances of AI use within BULR have been relatively rare. When they do occur, editors typically identify them through inconsistencies in writing style. These cases often stem from time pressure rather than intentional misuse, reflecting a broader issue of student burnout and overcommitment.
Meanwhile, the Collegiate Consulting Group has taken a more structured approach by implementing a comprehensive AI policy aligned with real-world industry practices. According to President Tanay Subramanian, the group promotes using AI to “enhance work, but not replace it,” particularly in tasks like research and data gathering. However, final outputs must reflect human judgment — a skill still highly valued in the consulting field.
For members like Emmitt Rattey, the presence of AI is not inherently problematic. Instead, its convenience can make it tempting to rely on. Still, many students remain committed to developing their own critical thinking skills, taking pride in delivering high-quality work without overdependence on automation.
As AI continues to evolve, both organizations highlight a shared principle: technology should support learning, not replace the human insight at its core.
