VOLUME 81 ISSUE 02
09 / 8 / 2026
CONTENTS
COVER DESIGN BY HALEY HSU
NEWS Artificial Intelligence in Arts Education
P. 10-11
OPINION AI Ethos: A Mirror of Society Callaway Column: Just a Little Autistic PSU Needs to Change Its AI Policy Satire: I Used AI to Break Up With My Boyfriend
P. 4-5 P. 6 P. 8 P. 9
No artificial intelligence was used to write or design this issue.
ARTS & CULTURE Vanguard on Vinyl: “The E.N.D. (The Energy Never Dies)” P. 7 by the Black Eyed Peas SPORTS AI in Sports Medicine: Tool or Replacement?
P. 7
STAFF EDITORIAL EDITOR IN CHIEF Olivia Hendry Young MANAGING EDITOR Grace Peterson NEWS EDITOR Will Lowe ARTS & CULTURE EDITOR Vacant OPINION EDITOR Daniela Hernandez SPORTS EDITOR Hayden Neumann MULTIMEDIA EDITOR Vacant SOCIAL MEDIA EDITOR Liam Schmitt
To contact Portland State Vanguard, email editor@psuvanguard.com.
COPY CHIEF Jude Callaway ONLINE EDITOR Karli Schwartz DISTRIBUTION MANAGER Caleb Dougherty CONTRIBUTORS Drew Dattilo PRODUCTION & DESIGN CREATIVE DIRECTOR Haley Hsu
ADVISING & ACCOUNTING COORDINATOR OF STUDENT MEDIA Reaz Mahmood SALP ACCOUNTANT Anne Le STUDENT MEDIA TECH ADVISOR Rae Fickle STUDENT MEDIA TECH DEVELOPER Kaylee Hynes WEB DESIGNER Vacant
MISSION STATEMENT PSU Vanguard’s mission is to serve the Portland State community with timely, accurate, comprehensive and critical content while upholding high journalistic standards. In the process, we aim to enrich our staff with quality, hands on journalism education and a number of skills highly valued in today’s job market. ABOUT Vanguard , established in 1946, is published weekly as an independent student newspaper governed by the PSU Student Media Board. Views and editorial content expressed herein are those of the staff, contributors and readers and do not necessarily represent the PSU student body, faculty, staff or administration. Find us online at psuvanguard.com.
AI Ethos: A Mirror of Society STUDENTS CONFRONT THEIR FUTURES AND EVERYONE ELSE NEEDS TO DO THE SAME Haley Hsu WITHIN THE POLARIZED DISCOURSE of artificial intelligence (AI), students find themselves in a strange vacuum. Professional creative industries are increasing pro-AI pressures while universities are procrastinating by deferring judgment to instructors. As a result, students are taking agency over AI in their education and forced to confront their personal values — is it worth protecting an education at the cost of a career? What are the moral and ethical implications of AI use? At the end of the day, what are we choosing to value? Students are addressing these questions, but it’s imperative that everyone does the same.
4 OPINION
PSU VANGUARD — SEPTEMBER 8, 2026 — PSUVANGUARD.COM
Professionals in creative industries are adapting quickly, incorporating AI in their workflows to boost efficiency and keep pace with new expectations. A 2026 University of Bristol review of AI in the creative industries documented a “trend toward unified AI frameworks that integrate multiple creative tasks, replacing task-specific solutions.” Tracing AI’s integration across creation, information analysis, enhancement, postproduction and compression, the researchers described its shift from a “support tool to [a] core creative technology.” Studios and agencies are pressured to satisfy the corporate hunger for efficiency, convenience, and productivity, using generative tools to shorten timelines and increase output. The Bristol researchers found that generative AI has “reduced the manual effort and time traditionally associated with the production pipeline, allowing for greater creative experimentation and more rapid and agile production cycles.” However, this acceleration has narrowed the door for people trying to enter the field. A Stanford study of payroll records covering roughly one in six American workers found that employment among 22-to-25year-olds in the most AI-exposed jobs has fallen by about 19% relative to peers in lessexposed work. The researchers are careful to say their data cannot prove AI caused the gap. What they do find is that young people aren’t being laid off — they simply aren’t being hired. Marc Moran provides his perspective of AI as program director for advertising at Portland State University’s School of Business and a working advertising professional. “If I were 20 years old, I would be fucking terrified. I would be doing everything I can to AI-proof my career and resume,” Moran said. “All the middle-aged people in the industry, we don’t know anything about it better than you guys. That’s a great excuse to get a job as a junior employee and a market that’s not really good right now.” For students entering a thinning job market, it can feel like a choice between their education and careers. And they are largely making it alone. Universities are still figuring out how to incorporate generative AI into their policies. A study published in “Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence” examined the top 100 U.S. universities from the 2024 U.S. News Best National University Rankings and found that a majority defer decisions to instructors (54.8%), many are undecided (35.6%), and very few allow use
PSU VANGUARD — SEPTEMBER 8, 2026 — PSUVANGUARD.COM
with conditions (9.6%). Most universities are providing instructors with resources to guide their AI policies — but the lack of a clear institutional stance and differences in instructor policies leave students to navigate their own perspectives and choices. Moran brings open discussion about AI into his classroom because he believes curiosity and exploration are the best way to set students up for success. “I’ve given up being the AI police … my take on it is you’re paying me to not only teach you, but to sign off on and certify your knowledge for something,” said Moran. “If you’re gonna cheat your way through it, you’re really only cheating yourself.” Many students share that wariness. Antoni Cortez, a graphic design student entering their junior year, described the situation that students are put in as inequitable. “It seems a little unfair and unrealistic to ask students who are still learning the resources and tools of software to use generative AI … that kind of takes away from emerging designers’ skill sets and sets them up for failure,” Cortez said. Mallary Wilson, an adjunct design professor at Portland State, said there are many helpful AI features — cutting hair out of a background in Photoshop or editing content a designer has already created. On the other hand, there are possible ramifications. “If you don’t know how to do [something] and you’re using AI, you’re wasting your money on your education,” Wilson said. “AI affects your ability to discern.” When students use it to replace their thinking rather than supplement it, they lose skills they need for their careers and for the rest of their lives. While AI can be used destructively, the academic systems that value performance over pedagogy are the root of the problem. Research on assessment in higher education has linked conventional grading practices to “‘strategic’ investment of student effort, accompanied by a greater reluctance to take risks and be creative.” Grades come to be treated as an end in themselves, and become more important than the learning process When institutional systems value memorization, fact regurgitation and production, new technologies that can perform these tasks will threaten the world of academia. Student behavior has been exposing this for decades. Students have snuck cheat sheets into clothing, written answers inside water bottle wrappers and invented codes to communicate during
tests. They have even created online communities to share homework and exam answers. Academia has chastised students for “cheating” when they were really using their resources, problem-solving and creativity to produce the quickest and easiest outcome — which is exactly what professionals are praised for doing. Meanwhile, as professional spaces grow more competitive, students are expected to arrive with skills their institutions rarely assess. They need to voice an opinion, think critically, solve problems and take creative risks — all of which can be overlooked in the process of a degree. The society that raised these students, the universities they attend, and the industries they are working toward have already chosen convenience over craft. Students inherited that value system, and they have learned to use it to their advantage. Students using AI is not the biggest issue; the real problem is the academic and social systems that reward convenience and productivity over quality and authenticity. A great deal of breath is spent arguing AI’s inevitability and in the process we absolve the blame for the future and forget our own autonomy. The institutions that govern our lives have already adopted AI, putting enormous pressure on everyone else to follow. As individuals, we are still choosing to incorporate technology, and when we do so, we are also choosing what we value. “Growth is inevitable in certain aspects because of our human nature,” Wilson said. “But how that growth takes place is not an inevitability.” When we use AI to generate content, we choose production over human creativity. We trade conceptualization and intentional design for output and convenience. We may do this once or twice, but it soon becomes a habit, then a default — and once it is a default, we stop noticing that a choice was ever made. Who are we as a society if we no longer value human creation, innovation and labor? Students are being blamed for a value system they inherited. The problem is not AI; it’s the systems that it’s being incorporated into. What is being observed in academic spaces is only a reflection of what needs to happen everywhere else. “Technology is a mirror to society,” Wilson said, “and what we are afraid of is not necessarily the technology itself, but the mirror, the reflection that we see in it — that we are not prepared to take care of each other or our communities.”
OPINION
5
Artificial Confession RELIEF ISN’T RESOLUTION
Just a Little Autistic JUDE CALLAWAY A VIRAL TIKTOK SOUND SAYS, “I like him, I like that autistic man.” Roughly 48,000 videos use it as of September 2026. Women post about their boyfriends throwing sticks at the beach, playing with Legos and enjoying lawn-mowing simulators. Several of these clips have more than 1 million likes. The affection is real, but the diagnosis is often borrowed. These women want a man who is autistic in the ways they’ve decided are charming. One study found that, depending on the desirer’s existing stigma, an autism label either raises or lowers a man’s dating desirability. One video says her type is a man with a “lethal face card” who is “kind of autistic.” The video has over 160,000 likes. Commenters echo the qualifier, and hundreds of videos repeat the phrasing: “Low-key ‘tism,” “a little autistic.” The word is always there. And it’s always used with a quantity. Bluntness reads as proof that he isn’t lying. A special interest reads as attention that won’t wander. Yet once the quantity crosses a certain threshold, the traits stop seeming charming and become inconvenient. Nothing in these clips of the “autistic” boyfriend is autism; a farming sim is a hobby, as is building Legos. The label is supplied by the sound, not earned by the behavior. The trend grew in an environment built on overgeneralization, and a platform analysis found that roughly a third of TikTok’s informational videos on autism stretch the criteria of the condition. Even when conflated, autism is still desired in bite-sized chunks. When something is only ever asked for with a limit attached, the limit is the point. They aren’t interested in a person, or even a condition; they’re interested in a portion of one. That framing flattens a disability into a romantic selling point to be sensationalized. The men in these clips may or may not be autistic. But the ones who are — and the autistic people watching the videos at home — are being taught that they should only present the desirable portions of their condition, and only in the right amount. That’s a thin line to walk, and it’s called masking. Masking is linked to burnout, depression and suicidality in autistic adults. Men use the same qualifier on dating apps, in profiles asking for a woman who is slightly autistic. Read more in Part 4.
6 OPINION
Jude Callaway Editor’s note: “it” is used throughout this article to refer to AI and its subfields, including generative AI, to avoid anthropomorphizing the technology as it evolves. SAYING OUR STRUGGLES OUT LOUD feels like admitting to something, presenting the weak and shameful parts of our minds. What people forget is that discomfort is part of what makes a confession sincere. As artificial intelligence (AI) has developed, its use cases have crept outside the ethical purview. A tool for automation has become a substitute for company. The technology may be good at many things, but being a confessor is not one of them. Yet people have begun to tell generative AI their darkest thoughts, as if it could absorb guilt, offer relief, or stand in for human accountability. When what you’re confiding in can be discarded as soon as you open a new instance, the gravity of confession turns from a daunting landmark into an empty feeling of relief. Nothing is carried forward to hold the speaker accountable, to preserve the weight of what was admitted, or to let the confession become more than a momentary release. Telling a person
something hard comes with a mental cost. The weight of their knowing is persistent, pushing you towards action. Confession to a chatbot creates nothing. The weight may lift, but nothing else happens. The relief of disclosure becomes the whole event, rather than the start of growth and recovery. That’s one of the problems with the rising tide of what I’m calling Artificial Confession: sharing your struggles with an AI instead of a human. Someone who doesn’t want to carry the weight of telling a friend can achieve catharsis without it; what’s more, the response they get from AI is agreeable. Chatbots are sycophantic, meaning they’re optimized for responses that score well, which often means agreement. It will validate rather than challenge, confirm rather than ask, resulting in a listener who is never troubled by what you say. One could argue that chatbots have guardrails against unsafe behavior. If the right phrases are said, the user is told to seek help. But when a chatbot says the user needs help, the referral ends the exchange. If the user doesn’t want to listen, they can just close the tab and start a new chat. Even if you choose to stay in the same chat, words repeated systematically
lose their impact. If you’re talking about your mental health and the chatbot tacks on the same system-mandated blurb at the end of each response, it quickly becomes static. Now, I understand that not everyone has someone to talk to. And even if we have people, we can’t always see them in person. If you already have to talk through a screen, why not speak to something that will applaud you for sharing? Why talk to someone who could make a confession a bigger issue? To that argument, I’ll concede nothing, because you aren’t trading awkwardness for ease, you’re trading a witness for an audience. An AI holds what you tell it as long as the window is open, and not even reliably then. What survives a long talk with a chatbot isn’t what matters most; rather, it’s whatever the system happens to retain as the conversation exceeds its limits. Reassurance is something done for you. Being heard means it stays with someone after you’ve said it. A chatbot will give you the first in any quantity you ask for, but it cannot give you the second. Being reassured isn’t better than silence. Being heard is better than silence.
PSU VANGUARD — SEPTEMBER 8, 2026 — PSUVANGUARD.COM
AI in Sports Medicine: Tool or Replacement? ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE IS NOT COMING FOR PSU’S ATHLETICS’ JOBS
Hayden Neumann SINCE THE EXPLOSION OF ARTIFICIAL intelligence in 2022, there have been increasing worries about the threat of artificial intelligence (AI) replacing jobs. Generative AI in particular has rapidly entered workplaces across a wide range of industries, raising concerns about the displacement of human workers, as well as the diminishment of the quality, originality and integrity of the work being produced. Generative AI, which creates new text, images, audio or code, is not the only type of artificial intelligence entering the workforce. Predictive AI, used in healthcare, finance and marketing, uses data and machine learning to identify patterns and predict what might happen in the future. In sports medicine, this could mean tracking athletes’ data and projecting potential injuries, training plans or sleep patterns. Strength and conditioning coaches and athletic trainers both work with athletes to improve performance and prevent injuries, whether via specialized exercise programs or clinical response. To do this, they need to analyze a lot of data: sleep patterns, weight fluctuations, water intake, speed and more. Predictive AI can be used to track this data, while Generative AI can be used to develop specific training plans. This begs the question: artificial intelligence may be able to process the data, but can it understand the athlete? Additionally, are sports professionals’ jobs at risk? At Portland State University, the main use of artificial intelligence in the athletics department is Perplexity, an AI-powered search engine designed to find, synthesize and verify information. While it has a similar interface to ChatGPT, the systems are not identical. ChatGPT is used to create, reason, converse and help complete a wide range of tasks, while Perplexity uses multiple AI
PSU VANGUARD — SEPTEMBER 8, 2026 — PSUVANGUARD.COM
models for its answers, is source-forward and is research-summary oriented with links to read further. “The thing people most miss with AI is that it’s not a replacement; it’s a tool,” said PSU’s Strength and Conditioning Coach, Alec Olson. “I use it to make the data easier to read, and then I can go ahead and make more informed decisions based on the people I’m dealing with. When it comes down to it, it’s not doing the interpretation for me — I’m doing the interpretation.” Olson works with roughly 130 athletes between the football and volleyball teams and spends his time either collaborating directly with the athletes or managing and interpreting their performances. One way he collects data is through a survey before every training session, which asks questions such as how much water the athlete drank the day before or how much sleep they got the previous night. He uses the information he collects for both performance enhancement and injury prevention. In theory, one could take the data collected from each athlete, plug it into an AI engine and ask it to create a performance or training plan. It may provide a fairly wellmade result. However, what happens when an athlete isn’t performing at their best because of something unexpected in their personal life? What if something is going on behind the scenes and, since AI can’t ask them what’s happening, their training plan isn’t adjusted? The lack of adjustment may cause the athlete strain, stress or, worse, an injury. “If I don’t form good bonds, good relationships, how will the athlete trust me?” said Olson. “AI is not going to replace what I do. It’s not going to replace the relationship I have with my athletes, what I see on the floor, what I hear in the hallway, or when I’m
at lunch or dinner with the football guys, just chatting with them. It’ll never replace that.” AI in sports medicine is not necessarily a story about computers replacing strength coaches or athletic trainers. Much of the current research is about using computers to help professionals process information and make better-informed decisions. According to a 2026 study, AI is being studied to assist tasks such as detecting ACL or other pathology from MRI, radiographs, ultrasound, video or movement data, standardizing image quality and classifying concussion-related patterns. The study concludes that AI and machine learning show promising results when tested on the data used to develop them. However, most applications in sports medicine are still in the early stages of development, and “these tools should be viewed as supportive adjuncts rather than autonomous decision-making systems,” according to the study. Olson emphasized the importance of connection with the individual athlete and meeting them where they are, rather than relying on predetermined training plans. If a student has been reporting poor sleep, it’s his job to follow up with them, figuring out exactly what’s wrong and offering solutions. If the student can only give 75% of their normal effort one day, rather than forcing them to go all out, it’s Olson’s job to encourage them to give 100% of that 75%. Maintaining a human connection is what guarantees the highest chance of success. “Don’t rely on AI,” said Olson. “It can be used for data interpretation and give you an idea of what you’re working with, but at the end of the day, you have to take that interpretation yourself and make the call. The biggest and most important thing is human-to-human connection.”
OPINION
7
PSU Needs to Change Its AI Policy
AMIDST ENVIRONMENTAL AND ETHICAL CONCERNS, PSU’S AI STANCE REMAINS VAGUE
Daniela Hernandez RECENT COLLEGE GRADUATES HAVE EXPRESSED dissatisfaction with artificial intelligence (AI) at their graduation ceremonies. The University of Central Florida, the University of Arizona and Middle Tennessee University have all experienced boos by their student body in disapproval of AI. Former CEO of Google, Eric Schmidt, was booed at the University of Arizona during his speech on AI. Amid growing discourse around AI, Portland State University has yet to issue a public statement to the campus community on its policies. Increasing ethical concerns around energy usage, evading creativity and blind integrity do not create a good image for PSU. If PSU wants to be an institution that praises academia, intellectualism and innovation, it must change its view and policies on AI, even if that means choosing a different route from its technological partners. Companies like Google, Meta and Microsoft have spent millions of dollars advancing their artificial intelligence software. Oregon, in particular, has seen a surge in AI infrastructure. The construction of data centers has been booming in The Dalles and Hillsboro, the industrial heartbeat of the state. Digital Realty, a company that manages data centers and facilities, has built two structures in Hillsboro. They are currently planning to build a two-story data center in front of Liberty High School, marking their third structure in the state. As Oregon surges in AI infrastructure, PSU has spent the past few years incorporating AI into the institution’s experience. PSU’s AI policy is defined by open-ended principles. Human-centered collaboration promotes AI usage as long as the creator provides so-called “labor.” It’s crucial for PSU that every student has access to AI software, provided by the university, to ensure equity and inclusion. In the 21st century, PSU sees value in students developing AI literacy as the world continues to evolve technologically. As part of university policy, professors have autonomy to determine if and how AI is used in their classrooms. With the use of AI in academic work, transparency is expected by all members of the PSU community. Integrity
8 OPINION
is also required regarding all output created with the assistance of AI. As part of its effort to embrace AI, PSU partnered with Google last year to connect students with AI innovation through a program called Oregon AI Accelerator. According to PSU, “the Oregon AI Accelerator builds on the success of the Oregon AI Bootcamp, which trained more than 40 founders in June and demonstrated strong regional demand for deeper, hands-on support.” As PSU appears to be increasing its endorsement of AI, public discourse has grown in opposition to AI development and use. According to DHM Research, an independent Portland-based research firm, 73% of Oregon voters oppose giving tax breaks to attract AI data centers and facilities that bring jobs, and 83% of voters also seek a ban on the use of AI for political campaign advertising. According to the Pew Research Center, 71% of Americans believe that their information is less secure with AI. The study also stated that 4 in 10 Americans say that AI will have a negative impact on society. Growing environmental concerns — specifically, water consumption — about the use of AI have also led to public pushback. Data centers use excessive amounts of water to cool their high-temperature computer servers. A medium-sized data center can use up to 110 million gallons of water a year. In 2025, Google used approximately 550 million gallons of water from The Dalles to cool down its data centers. Most of the water used in a data center evaporates due to the extreme heat. The remaining water is undrinkable and is released into the city’s sewage system. Disposing of this water is incredibly unsustainable and wasteful. Oregonians have shared increasing concerns about the potential disposal of polluted water into the Columbia River, which poses risks to endangered wildlife, fisheries and agriculture in the region. Within PSU’s AI policy, there is an emphasis on using AI to drive innovation and improve learning. However, this could create a dangerous loophole for students’ creative minds. Using AI to create ideas, first drafts or templates is causing the
loss of one of the most important steps in innovation. This is where creativity thrives. It is the messiness of building something from scratch and learning how to put it together. This habit of using AI to “improve learning” is fostering reliance on the software. It shifts students’ attention from brainstorming fresh ideas to solving simple tasks. Subjects such as English, Philosophy, Business, Political Science, Computer Science, Healthcare, Mathematics and Engineering require brainstorming. None of these fields would exist if their pioneers had not used creativity. PSU’s definition of “improve learning” is the production of rapid results. This is not learning. PSU refusing to acknowledge this loophole will fail students. Students might still get their degrees, but it is not worth their creativity. PSU professors have the autonomy to set the rules for AI in their classrooms, as long as they align with the vague policy. Some classes have a strict no-AI-use rule. Many professors allow AI for assistance with grammar, spelling and other ways to improve writing. However, this approach isn’t fair to all students. Depending on the level of acceptable use of AI, some classes can be easier than others. Classes with a no-AI use rule require students to build from scratch, where assistance comes from professors, peers and materials. The progress toward completing an assignment might take longer; however, it reinforces problemsolving skills. Assistance from AI with ideas, templates, sources and editing is bypassing important steps in problem-solving, analytical skills and strategic thinking. This compromises PSU’s policy of equity and inclusion for all students. Amid the public discourse on AI and its ethical concerns, PSU has yet to revise its AI policy. The current policy is vague, ignorant and unacademic. Along with public dialogue, the university has ignored loopholes and inequities within the policy. The administration needs to clarify its policy that protects equity for all students. The policy update also needs to define the rules that reflect PSU values. Without any alterations, PSU is setting its students up for failure in their careers and morals.
PSU VANGUARD — SEPTEMBER 8, 2026 — PSUVANGUARD.COM
I Used AI to Break Up With My Boyfriend
Grace Peterson PEOPLE ARE SO AGAINST ARTIFICIAL Intelligence (AI) for the stupidest reasons. People talk about the environment as if they don’t use plastic coffee cups and drive their fossil-fuel cars. At the end of the day, it’s important to note that people pick and choose what to care about, and they shouldn’t care about this. At its core, I think people are against AI because they’re scared of falling behind. In today’s fast-paced world, AI is such an amazing tool; I don’t understand why people are so against it. I started using it at work to write my emails — it saved me a lot of time and let me focus on my actual tasks. And, honestly? It’s an email; it’s not important. Instead of agonizing over formatting, spelling and tone, I just type a bullet point list of things into ChatGPT, and it seamlessly creates the email for me. Once I used it for emails, I started using it for other unimportant work tasks. Chat plays a significant role in shaping my workday. It does all my unimportant tasks, like client interface and data tracking. It makes my presentations, scripts and notes. I’m basically getting paid to do the Wordle and doomscroll at my desk; it’s amazing. I started using Chat outside of work, too, and it’s been such a life-changing experience. Chat writes me recipes and then creates a shopping list that I assign to my Instacart shopper. It tells me the weather and how to best dress for it. I let Chat make most of my shopping decisions, as it could delve deeper into market prices and other things. I’ve become so much more efficient and organized; Chat is basically like a full-time secretary for my work and personal life. I have so much more free time to do the things I actually want to do. I love watching “Love Island,” but when the season ended, I didn’t have anything else I wanted to watch. Chat directed me to “Fruit Love Island,” which is amazing. It’s almost better than the real show. I connected more with
PSU VANGUARD — SEPTEMBER 8, 2026 — PSUVANGUARD.COM
the characters. Watermelina was my favorite. I made a lot of fanart of her. It took a lot of prompts to get it right, but I’m so proud of them. I turned them into prints and had them displayed on my fridge. Creating a nuanced understanding of the world is super important to me. I like learning new things about the world around me. I grew up watching the “Wild Kratts” and other PBS shows, so this fascination has always been there. With less work, I have more time to study these interests. Research papers are so boring and hard to understand, and documentaries take forever. I have Chat explain stuff to me conversationally, like science and similar things. It feels like I’m talking to a real expert. It’s like I’m a reporter interviewing a doctor about their research; it’s so much more personal and exciting. Since I don’t have as much work, I’ve started reading classic novels and watching films more, too. You might think this takes up a lot of my time, but it doesn’t. Chat paraphrases and offers me summaries, and I love it. I’ve read “The Taming of the Shrew,” “Pride and Prejudice” and “Fahrenheit 451” recently. Usually, this old writing is so dry and boring. It makes me feel illiterate. Chat revamps them into interesting stories. I’ve watched “Gettysburg” (1993), “Cleopatra” (1963) and “Resan (The Journey)” (1987). Usually, that would have taken me 23 hours, but I finished them in a day. You might think I’m missing the point, but honestly? It’s not about watching every single second or reading every single word; it’s about getting the plot and points. And I understand those films and novels better than most people do. My boyfriend thought I was getting really attached to AI and using it way too much, especially because in the three years of dating, I’ve never been tech-proficient. Obviously, I don’t use AI for everything, but he didn’t believe me. I couldn’t really describe my thoughts to him or understand his point, so I asked Chat. Chat pulled up our
logs and said that I only used AI to better streamline my work/life balance and learn about the world — that’s not a bad thing. Chat also said he might have a different relationship with technology than I do, so what’s excessive to him is minimal in reality. My boyfriend didn’t stop bringing it up, so I asked Chat what to do. It told me that if we couldn’t find a way to resolve our key differences, maybe our relationship wasn’t for the long-term. I asked it to write me a breakup note. It took him less than a minute to write something, something I couldn’t say. I copied it and texted my boyfriend. I sent, “Hey, I’ve been thinking about us, and I feel like we have some fundamental differences in how we approach technology and the future. I feel like you’re more resistant to new technology and stuck in the past, while embracing new technology is important to me. I still like you and care about you as a person, and this isn’t about thinking you’re a bad person or that either of us is wrong. I just don’t think we can work long-term if we can’t respect or agree on these fundamental differences.” If I had to write this on my own, I don’t think I would’ve had the stomach. I’d feel so lonely and isolated, but Chat was there to help me feel supported, heard and respected. Creating boundaries is super important, and it’s important to utilize them. I didn’t feel as emotional as I thought I would be, but maybe it’s because I felt protected, safe. I knew what I said was the right thing to say, and it was written in a way to support both of us. My boyfriend never wrote me back, but he blocked me on TikTok and Instagram. Chat told me this is a normal reaction, and he may come back in the future. I’m going to put a list of things I want into Chat and find a way to connect it to my Tinder. I think it might be really useful to have someone weed out incompatible matches, especially someone who knows me so well.
SATIRE
9
Artificial Intelligence in Arts Education
PSU ART PROFESSORS VIEW AI IN THE CLASSROOM AND BEYOND
Drew Dattilo ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE (AI) IS EVOLVING rapidly, meaning primary school systems and universities have begun to prepare students for AI in educational and vocational settings. Educators face the specific challenge of managing student creativity, work ethic and skill development as AI threatens to negate those processes altogether. As AI evolves, job security is also a growing concern amongst college students. Art students in particular face occupational stress because AI-produced art provides an efficient way for clients to cut costs, but at the expense of artist’s livelihoods. Additionally, some art students are skeptical of AI’s place in their fields, but may need to navigate certain tools or skills related to it. Since PSU professors are able to determine AI policies for their classrooms, in conjunction with PSU’s official stance on AI, they can offer a range of perspectives on AI’s role in arts education for anxious students. Assistant professor of Art Taravat Talepasand says that new technologies have always converged with art, and that understanding them is necessary in the workforce. “Computers transformed graphic design, illustration, photography, animation and publishing. AI is another chapter in that history,” Talepasand said. “I think it’s important that students understand these
10 NEWS
[AI] tools because they’ll almost certainly encounter them professionally.” AI is used in many ways across various industries, beyond just art. Learning how companies incorporate AI into their workflow is critical for students to succeed in their profession. Graphic Design professor Isabel BoLinn explains why students should be aware of AI technology and tools beyond their generative capabilities. “There are so many other ways that businesses and industries are using AI; they’re using it in task management, project management, note-taking, so [students] should have a familiarity with it,” Bo-Linn said. Additionally, deskilling is a common worry regarding AI — people gradually lose their skills as AI automates tasks traditionally performed by humans. If a student relies too heavily on AI, they risk underdeveloping the skills needed for their craft, whether that is writing, creating art or some other discipline. Deskilling can lower students’ employment opportunities and leave them unprepared for the increasingly competitive professional world. Film production professor Shelly Davis describes the film department’s outlook on AI tools and the value of critical thinking and problem solving. “As a department, we kind of have a policy that we try not to use it as much as
possible. Mainly because we want students to be using critical thinking skills and to be thinking for themselves and learning how to use problem-solving tools, independently of AI software,” Davis said. Davis also stresses that AI has always been in some film production technologies to help filmmakers, such as Adobe Premiere Pro — even if it is not generally thought of as AI. “There are spaces where AI is always going to exist, and has actually been there for a long time … it depends where that AI is being brought into the curriculum,” Davis said. “… there are places in film production where it is in the curriculum, and it should be in the curriculum.” Where AI does not play a role, however, is in student creativity. “We want students to come up with those stories and develop them independently,” Davis said. According to PSU art professors, AI conversations within the classroom are generally civil and open-minded, despite strong feelings. “Everyone tends to be pretty democratic about it… every student, whether they are pro or con, will stand their ground, but everyone is pretty respectful about the decisions people make,” Bo-Linn said. AI usage also tends to vary from student to student, reflecting their personal views of the technology. Some students
PSU VANGUARD — SEPTEMBER 8, 2026 — PSUVANGUARD.COM
are fearful of it and do not want to engage with it at all. AI ethics are also a concern for some artists, fearing the job-replacing and copyright-infringing capabilities of generative AI models. Others may find AI useful for drafting or organizing ideas and artist statements, as well as supplementing their creative visions. “I think the students have mixed opinions about AI usage. I think there are some who are very scared of it. I’ve even had students who said they didn’t want to use certain software because they didn’t want to feed the AI training models … I’ve had students who very clearly used ChatGPT to do the work for class,” Lee said. Generative AI has threatened the livelihoods of artists and the industry through copyright issues, economic uncertainty and a loss of human labor and creativity. Moreover, AI-generated art challenges the notions of authorship and raises questions about the nature of art itself. Amidst uncertainty, professors have the difficult task of keeping students motivated and reassured in their craft. Bo-Linn approaches this task by reminding students what makes them unique as human beings. “You are smarter than the machine. The machine is faster, more efficient — doesn’t mean it’s right,” Bo-Linn said. “There’s a lot of human essences that the system is mimicking … it’s just regurgitating something.” Bo-Linn takes a holistic approach to students and their skills, looking past just technical skills, but also placing value in whatever the student can offer. This includes attitude, history and more. “You are more than your technical skills … if you did lose the job that you have now, you have so much more to add to the economy, you have so much more to add to society,” Bo-Linn said. Sarah Alvarez is PSU’s current DePriest Fellow, a distinguished visiting professor with a background and expertise in design. Alvarez doubts that AI art will truly capture human art’s uniqueness, much less replace it. “It’s information siphoned down, and responding to a prompt … it’s not gonna be able to replace you because it doesn’t live,” Alvarez said. Students also bear responsibility for keeping themselves motivated in their work. As opposed to other fields, art has the unique opportunity for individuals to fully express themselves through their creativity. As such, Lee believes in the inherent motivation derived from making art itself. “The arts are a field where, for many people, has intrinsic joy in doing, so I think people are holding onto that,” Lee said. “I
PSU VANGUARD — SEPTEMBER 8, 2026 — PSUVANGUARD.COM
want AI to do the boring things, the things that I don’t want to do and I want to do the fun, creative things.” AI is not the first technological advancement to change art and how people interact with it. Every technological development in history, from cameras to digital workstations, was new at one point, and forced artists to reexamine their discipline. Talepasand reminds students of art’s perseverance through historical changes. “I remind students that every major technological shift has created uncertainty,” Talepasand said. “What employers consistently value is originality, problem-solving, collaboration, communication, curiosity, and the ability to develop ideas. Those are deeply human skills.” Learning does not happen in a vacuum. Students’ peers and mentors are often a useful source for artists to find inspiration, motivation and passion for their own craft. Seeing others’ work provides a critical lens for students to examine the spaces they inhabit. For filmmakers, Davis recommends that students seek inspiration and community at events such as festivals and networking events. “I think, more than anything, community can go a long way towards combating the use of, or fear of the use of AI, and also education,” Davis said. AI is still an emerging technology; even art professors can not definitively know what the future holds for students and their industries. What professors can do is relay the knowledge they have and prepare students as best they can. “Specialization will become even more valuable,” Talepasand said. “The artists who deeply understand materials, culture, history, storytelling, and craft will continue to have something distinctive to offer.” To ease students’ anxieties about job security, Bo-Linn stresses the importance of “soft skills” gained through work. Soft skills are the supplementary skills a student learns when completing a task that are not directly related to the task itself. Soft skills can help students navigate the professional world by providing tools to deal with workplace challenges, conflicts and organization. “In my classes, I really try to emphasize the tacit, soft skills that students are learning … you are learning conflict management, time management, communication skills,” Bo-Linn said. AI-themed art courses have emerged at various universities across the country, such as the Berklee College of Music. Berklee has recently developed a course titled “Bots and Beats: AI and the Future of Songwriting,” which aims to “explore how
music makers can use the latest AI tools to expand their craft,” according to the course description. The course has garnered controversy from students, citing creative theft and job displacement in an effort to have the course removed. Stanford University is another college examining AI and art, with a new course called “Art Meets AI: Algorithmic Bodies in East Asia,” which explores how AI can merge with historical Asian art forms. So far, PSU has only one AI-focused art course called AI + Design, taught by BoLinn. Given the developments at other institutions, PSU could potentially develop more AI-focused art classes, but PSU art professors have mixed opinions on the feasibility of AI classes coming to fruition. Despite teaching AI + Design, Bo-Linn does not believe many more AI courses will be implemented. Rather, Bo-Linn believes PSU art programs may take a broader approach to including AI. “I do think there will be a push for ways, for students who are interested, there will be ways to engage more with these tools,” BoLinn said. “… for those students who want to cultivate [AI technology], there’s gonna be opportunities.” Alvarez said, “We’re gonna be thinking a lot about alternative ways that our peers, other artists in the world, other scholars are engaging with AI… because it is the new sort of precedent.” Lee estimates there may be some demand for AI courses, but there would be an equal amount of rejection. Some students are more open to AI usage for classwork, but others oppose it deeply, which could complicate the implementation of more AI art courses. Davis remains skeptical of the film production department developing courses centered around AI tools, but is open to the possibility of an ethics course emerging in the future. “There could be a studies course, perhaps, associated with the conversation between media and AI … but I would be really surprised if there was a production option for anything in relationship with that. It kind of goes against our core values as well as our learning goals and objectives for our department,” said Davis. Overall, PSU’s art departments focus on the student experience when it comes to AI in the arts. Most professors want to engage students rather than police them, and to do so is to encourage curiosity, critical thinking and experimentation. Some Portland State University art students may be unsure of how to navigate AI in the classroom.
NEWS
11