Analysis of artificial intelligence discourse across CUNY databases (May 2023-January 2025) reveals how students navigate learning technologies within institutional voids, showing not simple adoption patterns but ethical negotiations and collective norm creation mirroring pandemic-era peer support networks. submission_t3_1l5mni6 (66 upvotes) exemplifies mature usage where an Anatomy student uses ChatGPT for chapter summarization and practice quiz generation—not as learning substitution but as cognitive augmentation supplementing institutional resources. comment_mxptnmi captures mathematical comprehension support where students seek process understanding rather than answer extraction, while comment_m9newdm reveals accessibility dimensions as an ADHD student describes AI tools providing executive function support unavailable through disability services, particularly during 2-3am hours when previous analysis documented peak crisis activity. Detection anxiety emerges in comment_mtvazl4’s documentation of Turnitin falsely flagging 15-25% of original work as AI-generated, while submission_t3_1kschym’s account of receiving zeros across all Zybooks coursework for ChatGPT use illustrates consequences within surveillance regimes lacking understanding of legitimate versus substitutive AI engagement.

The institutional policy vacuum manifests in submission_1j9i0w6 where a mathematics professor’s directive to struggling students to “use ChatGPT” becomes interpreted as pedagogical abandonment, while comment_lsr5q7w captures a Dean’s List student interrogating CUNY’s burden of proof frameworks for AI accusations. This regulatory void forces students into ethical negotiations visible in submission_t3_1hecp41’s celebration of sections succeeding without AI assistance—peer-generated standards of achievement emerging through collective discourse rather than administrative decree. Student-led distinctions between comprehension support and wholesale substitution reveal active agents constructing vernacular pedagogies within digital learning spaces, creating what de Certeau would recognize as tactical knowledge production within institutional constraints. The connection students draw between AI adoption and insufficient institutional tutoring confirms how these tools fill support gaps similar to informal peer networks that emerged during March 2020’s 290% activity spike, suggesting continuity in how CUNY students leverage available technologies—Reddit forums or AI assistants—to construct learning infrastructure where institutional provision fails, particularly for students with learning disabilities, mental health challenges, or those studying when campus resources remain inaccessible.

Evidence Base:

  • Query: “ChatGPT”, “Claude”, “AI”, “artificial intelligence”, “generative” across 8 CUNY databases
  • Results: Analysis of AI-related discourse from May 2023-January 2025
  • Key Evidence IDs: submission_t3_1l5mni6 (AI study strategies, 66 upvotes), comment_m9newdm (ADHD accessibility), submission_t3_1kschym (academic consequences), comment_mtvazl4 (false detection anxiety)
  • Files: Query results stored in databases/current/scripts/