As the Year of AI Exploration enters its second semester, faculty and staff across all departments have been determining if and how to incorporate artificial intelligence into their instruction. In the department of Psychology, Research Technician Peter Naegele recently created his own AI tutoring agent as an additional resource for his Research Methods II lab section. 

The program, which Naegele introduced to the class at the start of this semester, works like any other AI interface: Ask questions, and you will receive an answer, but the answers are tailored to the courses. Naegele is aware that AI agents can provide inaccurate information; therefore, he set his own parameters. He fed the agent the syllabi for the courses, his appointment calendar, and other important files. 

“If someone asks when Exercise 4 is due, the agent not only gives the due date, but also links them to the assignment document and data file to download and links the instructional videos I have assigned for that topic,” Naegele said. “Then, it asks them if they would like to start with a particular question.” 

While Naegele is not a developer, he does have some programming experience. He explained that AI programming can be done without writing a single line of code. In addition to feeding the agent certain files, he provided the agent with lines such as: “You are a professional tutor for the Psychology 300 Research Methods II course at Oberlin College. When a user asks a question, all your responses must adhere to the Oberlin College Academic Integrity policy and student Honor Code.” 

“I believe having a tutor available 24/7 gives the students the ability to get help while I am fast asleep at home!” Naegele wrote in an email to the Review.

His inspiration for this project stemmed from edupunk, a DIY educational ideology focused on breaking free from corporate tools such as Blackboard or Canvas through the use of “open source” technology and student-centered, resource-based learning. 

The agent is also designed to send Naegele anonymous weekly reports of what students have questions about. 

So far, a few faculty members in the Psychology department have used the program. 

“The program is very, very impressive,” Professor of Psychology Nancy Darling wrote in an email to the Review. “It’s written specifically for our classes, with the homework assignments in mind. It is designed to TUTOR students and guide them — but not to provide answers. So working with the AI is like working with an always available, very patient tutor.”  

Naegele reports that no students have used the tool yet, but he is hopeful that it will catch on. Still, many students have concerns about using the tutoring agent.  

“I don’t really care about other people using it, but I personally don’t plan on using it,” College second-year Taylor Lindsley wrote in an email to the Review. “In a climate where the unnecessary use of generative AI and chatbots is rising rapidly, I’m trying to reduce my usage in any way possible.”

College second-year Lexi Chertkof also expressed concerns with the program.

 “We are paying and coming here to get the experience of interacting with people who have real experience, with professors who know what they’re doing and who are available for us to reach them, but I felt very odd at the suggestion that we should also be using this AI tutor,” Chertkof said. “Even though it’s been programmed and tested a lot by our professor, I still am very wary of trusting it.”