Generative Artificial Intelligence in Higher Education: Evidence from an Analysis of Institutional Policies and Guidelines

Nora McDonald,Aditya Johri,Areej Ali,Aayushi Hingle

2024-01-12

Abstract:The release of ChatGPT in November 2022 prompted a massive uptake of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) across higher education institutions (HEIs). HEIs scrambled to respond to its use, especially by students, looking first to regulate it and then arguing for its productive integration within teaching and learning. In the year since the release, HEIs have increasingly provided policies and guidelines to direct GenAI. In this paper we examined documents produced by 116 US universities categorized as high research activity or R1 institutions to comprehensively understand GenAI related advice and guidance given to institutional stakeholders. Through an extensive analysis, we found the majority of universities (N=73, 63%) encourage the use of GenAI and many provide detailed guidance for its use in the classroom (N=48, 41%). More than half of all institutions provided sample syllabi (N=65, 56%) and half (N=58, 50%) provided sample GenAI curriculum and activities that would help instructors integrate and leverage GenAI in their classroom. Notably, most guidance for activities focused on writing, whereas code and STEM-related activities were mentioned half the time and vaguely even when they were (N=58, 50%). Finally, more than one half of institutions talked about the ethics of GenAI on a range of topics broadly, including Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) (N=60, 52%). Overall, based on our findings we caution that guidance for faculty can become burdensome as extensive revision of pedagogical approaches is often recommended in the policies.

Computers and Society,Artificial Intelligence

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

The paper primarily explores the application and policy guidance of Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) in higher education. Specifically, the researchers analyzed the policies and guidelines related to the use of GenAI from 116 high research activity (R1) universities in the United States to comprehensively understand the recommendations and guidance provided by these institutions regarding GenAI.

The core questions of the paper include:
1. **Policy Guidance**: What guidance do higher education institutions provide regarding the use of GenAI?
2. **Overall Attitude**: What is the attitude of these institutions towards GenAI? Do they encourage or restrict its use?
3. **Ethical and Privacy Considerations**: Do these guidelines address ethical and privacy issues?

The analysis found that the majority of universities (63%) encourage the application of GenAI and provide detailed classroom usage guidelines (41%). More than half of the institutions offer example course syllabi (56%) and examples of courses and activities related to GenAI (50%) to help instructors integrate GenAI into their teaching. However, it is noteworthy that most activities are concentrated on writing, while activities related to programming and STEM are mentioned less frequently and are not specific enough (50%).

Additionally, the paper points out that although many institutions discuss the ethical issues of GenAI (52%), they also remind instructors to reconsider their teaching methods, which may increase the workload for teachers. Overall, the researchers believe that the current guidance may overly emphasize modifications to teaching methods while neglecting the long-term impact on teaching, the time investment of teachers and students, changes in the concept of ownership, and less than half of the institutions discuss the privacy impact and ethical issues of using GenAI.