Artificial Intelligence Tools

What the student participants had to say:

When asked how clear the generative AI policies were in Fall 2023 Ecampus courses, less than half of undergraduate students (48%) indicated their course policies were clear or very clear compared slightly more than one third of graduate students (36%). Therefore, there is an opportunity to increase the clarity of course policies.

In open-ended responses, some participants indicated that their instructors did not have a generative AI policy at all and/or that their instructors did not comment on the use of generative AI tools.

Based on the analysis of open-ended responses, student participants requested the following:

1. Write a course policy that is clear and transparent.
2. In the policy, describe when and how students can or should be using generative AI to meet course requirements. For example, include information about what work is necessary for students to complete independently before using generative AI for additional support.
3. In the course, model for students how to use generative AI tools to comply with the course policy.

What the student participants had to say:

Students reported mixed emotions about generative AI tools. For example, when asked to select emotions that describe how they feel about generative AI, nearly half of participants indicated both positive and negative emotions.

Participants also expressed a wide range of ethical concerns regarding these tools in general, and their own use of these tools in Ecampus courses specifically. However, participants clearly indicated that knowing how to use generative AI tools would be helpful for them in their careers. Over half of participants somewhat agreed or strongly agreed that knowing how to use generative AI tools would:

• help them at work
• help them get a job
• help them advance their careers

Students saw the value in knowing about these tools despite their mixed emotions and ethical concerns. In open-ended responses, they asked instructors to honor their autonomy, allowing them to thoughtfully choose their own engagement with these tools, including the option to decline engagement.

In open-ended responses, participants also asked instructors to:

1. Design more “meaningful” high stakes assignments and consider allowing students to use generative AI for low stakes assignments.
2. Guide students as to how generative AI might help them understand difficult concepts when instructors are not available to answer questions.
3. Consider assignments that relate to ways in which students might use these tools in a job within a specific discipline or field of study.

What the student participants had to say:

Over half of participants indicated that they were at least somewhat interested in receiving guidance from instructors on how to use generative AI tools in Ecampus coursework:

Interest in guidance from faculty was particularly strong for postbaccalaureate students and graduate student participants.

In their open ended-responses, participants wanted instructors to know that they want to learn about their discipline, not how to use generative AI tools to outsource their learning. In the analysis, student participants asked instructors to:

1. Center the educational experiences on course content and integrate generative AI tools to develop deeper learning; for example, help students learn how to use generative AI tools to save time on routine tasks so they can focus their cognitive efforts on producing high quality course assignments.
2. Help students learn how to balance the “skillful” use of generative AI tools with the appropriate levels of caution and skepticism about bias, inaccuracies, and misinformation in the AI generated output.
3. Consider the wide range of student values, understanding that some students may want to learn about these tools without being required to use them.