Zvezdelina Stankova, a mathematics professor at the University of California, Berkeley, used artificial intelligence to help edit an op-ed criticizing student math skills.
The admission highlights a growing tension in academia regarding the use of generative AI, particularly when used by educators to critique the academic performance of students.
Stankova wrote the piece for the San Francisco Standard, where she argued that many of her students are five to eight years [1] behind their expected grade level in mathematics. Following the publication of the article, Stankova confirmed her use of AI tools to refine the text.
"I used AI to ‘help edit’ an article about some of my students being ‘five to eight years’ behind," Stankova said [1].
Stankova said she utilized the technology to polish the language of the piece. Her primary goal was to draw attention to what she described as a severe math deficiency among the student population. She used the op-ed to argue for the implementation of stricter admissions standards, including the reinstatement of the SAT and ACT exams.
This perspective aligns with a broader movement within the university system. Thousands [2] of UC faculty have signed open letters calling for the return of these standardized tests to better gauge student readiness.
Reports on the extent of the AI's involvement vary. Some reports state the tool was used to help edit the piece [1], while other accounts suggest it was used to help write the viral op-ed [3].
Stankova's use of AI comes at a time when many universities are struggling to define acceptable boundaries for the technology. While students often face strict penalties for AI-generated submissions, the standards for faculty using these tools for public commentary remain less defined.
“"I used AI to ‘help edit’ an article about some of my students being ‘five to eight years’ behind."”
This incident underscores a perceived double standard in higher education regarding AI adoption. While institutions implement rigorous detection and punishment for student AI use to preserve academic integrity, faculty members are increasingly using the same tools for professional communication and public advocacy. The controversy shifts the focus from the professor's specific claims about math deficiencies to the ethics of transparency in academic authorship.
