As technology permeates every aspect of society, tribal colleges and universities face the unique challenge of integrating artificial intelligence (AI) while upholding academic integrity and cultural values. In response to that challenge, Navajo Technical University (NTU) embarked on a journey to craft an AI policy that reflects the institution’s mission, vision, and philosophy. While recognizing the transformative potential of AI in enhancing educational experiences, NTU also acknowledged the ethical dilemmas and cultural sensitivities inherent in its deployment.

Student perspectives played a central role in shaping AI policy. The university polled students and found that many view AI as a tool for empowerment in its capability to provide personalized learning experiences and expand access to educational resources, citing positive features such as AI’s ability to translate languages, provide adaptive learning, serve as a study aide, read a book aloud, or provide insights to help overcome writer’s block. “AI is great to use when you’re stuck on a thought. It can give helpful insights and suggestions to get your mind flowing with ideas for a paper or project,” said Adonis Alonzo, an environmental science major.

However, alongside enthusiasm, students voiced concerns about the ethical implications of AI technologies. Bias, misinformation, exclusion of Indigenous knowledge, and negative effects on learning emerged as recurring themes in discussions. Students pointed out AI’s potential for diluting the learning experience. “How can someone learn a new skill or knowledge when someone or something is making it easier? The experience in obtaining a skill or knowledge is the fun part of the journey, the destination is the lifelong reward,” commented administrative office major Anessa Boyd.

Oisin Francisco, a nursing major, expressed students’ concerns about AI’s ability to preserve cultural knowledge. “What are the pros and cons of AI for the Navajo Nation? Could we teach AI the ways of our ancestors? Could we put our faith in the technology to not mess up, to help pass the knowledge down to our future generations?” pondered Francisco.

Nearly all students agreed that AI should have limitations on its use. According to Anessa Boyd, “There should be limits to using AI . . . such as having a full-on conversation, and on relying on AI to answer questions in fear of being wrong.”

Students also felt troubled by AI’s potential to eliminate personal connections with their teachers. Industrial engineering major Nylana Murphy observed, “Teaching styles using real-life examples and experiences are common techniques to give students a better understanding and perspective. AI has no emotion or life experience to connect with the student. Human interaction is more of a creative limit AI cannot have.”

NTU’s faculty perspectives and expertise also played a pivotal role in shaping the institution’s AI policy. NTU faculty members serve as advocates for student learning and academic integrity, advocating for ethical AI practices that prioritize learning. Faculty members brought insight into the pedagogical implications of AI, including its implications for curriculum design, teaching methodologies, and student assessment strategies. Assessment is a shared concern, and in the humanities and social sciences where student writing plays a substantial role in assessment, faculty feel pressured to create new assessment formats that promote independent thinking and creativity while preventing unethical use of AI. Brian Connolly, an English professor at NTU, stated, “While there may be useful or interesting applications for this technology elsewhere, in my courses I’m interested in engaging with my students’ intelligence, not the probabilistic output of an artificial intelligence program like ChatGPT. No matter how good the software gets, AI can’t take the place of students’ ability to think critically for themselves, which is the foundation of active reading and effective writing skills.”

Developmental English professor Alex Tallant opposes the use of AI in his courses, maintaining that “AI removes the beauty of human fallibility; it diminishes the experience of being human.”

On the other hand, faculty in the technical disciplines noted the advantages of AI. For instance, AI can be used to generate and test computer code, render flat objects in three dimensions, or identify missing steps in a project plan. According to computer science professor Bhagya Patil, “AI is unique among technologies, in my opinion, because it will provide more communication between humans and robots. AI is occasionally misinterpreted to mean that computers will replace people. It’s about machines enhancing human capabilities, not replacing them.”

In finalizing the university’s AI policy, faculty and student perspectives remained central to the decision-making process. NTU ultimately chose a policy that leaves AI in the hands of the faculty, and its ethical use in the hands of students. The AI policy enables faculty to allow unlimited use of AI, limit its use, or prohibit all use in their courses; students must abide by those policies. The development of NTU’s AI policy exemplifies the intersection of cultural awareness, innovation, and academic freedom. By placing student learning and cultural sensitivity at the forefront, the university crafted a policy framework that not only harnesses the transformative potential of AI but also reflects the values and aspirations of the tribal university. NTU recognizes that its AI policy is a living document, and the school remains committed to fostering policies that provide an inclusive and equitable education that empowers all students to thrive in the digital age.