University of Chicago Expands Tech Restrictions: Bans AI, Laptops, and Phones in Core Social Science Courses
University of Chicago: The University of Chicago SSCD and UC Berkeley School of Law have introduced strict "analogue" policies banning generative AI, laptops, and smart devices. These device-free measures aim to prevent cognitive offloading, safeguard Socratic dialogue, and compel students to develop independent analytical writing and critical thinking skills.
University of Chicago: The Social Sciences Collegiate Division (SSCD) of the University of Chicago has announced a new rule stating that all Social Sciences Core undergraduate sequences should adopt an "analogue" learning approach. According to the rules, classes should become device-free spaces led by human faculty members; thus, the use of generative AI, laptops, smartphones, and wearables in classrooms is prohibited. This initiative has been approved by SSCD Master Jenny Trinitapoli, aiming to provide students with necessary skills to work with difficult primary texts manually before the use of AI in their more advanced classes.
As per the policy, all readings, discussions, and assignments should be performed manually, without the help of technology. Moreover, professors should refrain from the use of AI in making syllabuses and evaluating students' assignments unless it is proven that AI works as well as humans. Thus, the decision to ban AI is connected to the general institutional movement to preserve Socratic dialogues and critical thinking; it resembles the initiative adopted earlier at the University of Chicago Law School. There are some exceptions, however, allowing the use of AI in specific data analysis or disability accommodations.
This same pattern can be seen taking place in some of America’s biggest educational institutions like the Berkeley School of Law of the University of California. It introduced a ban on all uses of generative AI in any graded assignments or tests. Under this new system, law students cannot use any form of AI technology in coming up with paper ideas, making an outline for arguments, drafting their answers, revising their writings, correcting grammar, or translating text. Berkeley’s justification for this new policy was the notion that unfiltered mental effort in the form of thinking, analyzing, and writing remains the very base of legal education and skills. Similar to the University of Chicago, there will be some exceptions made to research activities for locating legal information and teaching AI ethics courses.
University of Chicago: Policy Overview & Key Restrictions
Below are the policy overview & key restrictions related to the University of Chicago:
| Feature | Policy Regulation |
| Target Audience | Undergraduate students enrolled in Social Sciences Core sequences |
| In-Class Devices | Laptops, mobile phones, tablets, and wearable AI devices strictly banned |
| AI Usage for Coursework | Prohibited for reading, drafting, revising, or translating assignments |
| Instruction & Grading | Faculty barred from using AI for syllabus creation or grading (unless verified) |
| Classroom Format | In-person, discussion-based sessions; recording of lectures/discussions barred |
| Primary Exceptions | Allowed only for narrow tasks like dataset analysis, citation research, or disability accommodations |
Institutional Objectives
-
Fostering Independent Thinking: As per SSCD Master Jenny Trinitapoli, the policy is meant to "enable students to read, write, and think without the use of AI" and then use complex technologies at a later point during their education.
-
Preventing Distractions & Supporting Socratic Discussions: By removing the devices, the distraction of the screen from the class will be eliminated and will encourage personal discussion between smaller seminar-style classes (up to 19 students).
-
Consistency with Institutional Policies: The policy is inspired by another "no-device" policy followed at the University of Chicago Law School for the first-year students.
Why AI Being banned for Students?
The ban on AI use by the students is a mandatory action for ensuring that basic cognitive functions are preserved. Although the AI technology is efficient in its performance, depending on it for carrying out researches, writing and solving problems leads to “cognitive offloading” avoiding mental work needed for developing analytical and critical thinking abilities and creative skills. By delegating tasks of composing and reflecting on the text to the algorithm, the student deprives himself of an opportunity to express his real voice in academic writing.
Siddhi Sharma is an education journalist at Jagran Josh. A Journalism and Mass Communication graduate from IP University, she brings sharp newsroom instincts developed during her previous stint at Zee News. At Jagran Josh, Siddhi specializes in decoding the educational updates. Her coverage is highly exam-centric, ranging from curated news blogs for competitive exams to crucial school board and university news. Combining her strong media foundations with a research-driven approach, she creates reliable, high-utility content that helps students and aspirants stay ahead of the curve. Her writing is factual, engaging, and tailored to meet the fast-paced needs of modern learners and exam aspirants.
