On January 22, the Faculty Senate approved a ‘Longwood University Policy on the Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Teaching & Learning’. As part of the new policy, “Faculty are required to include an AI statement in each syllabus, explaining if, when and how AI may or may not be used in each course.”
In addition to the AI syllabus statement, “Faculty are encouraged to lead a conversation with students in each course to explain the rationale for the AI guidelines and the relationship to course learning outcomes. Faculty are also encouraged to be transparent with students about how they use AI in the course themselves.”
During the meeting itself, faculty members discussed the specific language of the policy, particularly why faculty are only “encouraged” to be transparent about their own AI usage in a course. While the proposal passed nearly unanimously, this debate represents a wider split in higher education on how to handle AI.
Institutions of higher education across the country have scrambled to cope with the reality of mainstream AI usage. A 2025 NPR report, which drew on national survey data, found that roughly 30 percent of college instructors and more than 40 percent of academic administrators use generative AI tools on a weekly or daily basis for tasks such as lesson planning, assessment support and research.
Following Faculty Senate’s approval of the policy, The Rotunda sat down with a wide variety of Longwood faculty members about their use of AI, uncovering a range of approaches when it comes to lesson planning, AI detectors and other usages of AI in the classroom.
Some faculty, like Assistant Professor of Graphic & Animation Design Ren Barnes, avoid AI altogether. “I don’t touch AI at all for the sake of my students, and also for the sake of myself. I think there are a lot of ethical concerns regarding AI, and I don’t like where the industry is going right now,” he said.
Professor of Communication Studies, Dr. Naomi Johnson said she tepidly embraces AI in the workforce and classroom. “I actually have found that it has been incredibly helpful in helping me identify better [class] activities,” she said.
However, she did note that AI is not perfect. “I always have to modify what it comes up with… I know that [AI’s] marketing is that it will make you more efficient, but I have actually spent more time since I have used AI — it has not saved me time.”
On the other hand, the College of Business and Economics (CBE) has purchased their own AI tool to use within the classrooms, called BoodleBox AI. This is a collaborative AI platform used primarily in higher education which allows students to use multiple AI models in a secure environment.
CBE Dean Dr. Khawaja Mamun said to The Rotunda, “Faculty can put all of their students in the BoodleBox, and students can use AI in that platform. Then faculty can dictate them on how to use it, it is a more controlled way of AI. It’s the way the faculty wants it to be used, rather than just students using ChatGPT at home.”
“We are in a very interesting time with AI,” he said, “AI is coming, and it’s reducing the workforce. We don’t need ten people to do marketing anymore. One person can do ten people's jobs.” “But, new areas are going to pop up. Unless we get our students to learn this tool, so that they can be a part of the next wave of this new workforce,” he added.
The Rotunda has previously reported on Longwood’s response to AI in February 2025. In August 2024, Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs Dr. Larissa M. Smith created a task force to develop policy recommendations for the university. Following the unveiling of this policy proposal, the task force has been succeeded by an AI Advisory Board, which will continue research and conversations with stakeholders.
This proposal, having been approved by Smith, now goes to University President W. Taylor Reveley IV. According to Faculty Senate Administrative Assistant Sherry Reynolds, the president will consult with the provost to determine if the proposal needs approval from the Board of Visitors.
