Date
Publisher
arXiv
As generative AI (GenAI) use among students increases, educators face growing questions about how to support learning while addressing ethical and institutional concerns. This exploratory study examines a guided inquiry activity in which students co-designed a GenAI course policy. Students first developed individual policy proposals focused on appropriate and ethical use of GenAI, then collaboratively refined them by incorporating diverse stakeholder perspectives. The following research questions guided the study: 1) what practical factors do students prioritize in their GenAI use policies, and how do they justify these choices? and 2) how do participants reflect on the policy design process? Participants first completed readings, then used GenAI to brainstorm initial policy ideas. Next, they articulated their own perspectives through a written assignment and a course policy they designed individually. Finally, they incorporated diverse stakeholder perspectives by collaborating with peers to develop a collective policy. Analysis of student artifacts and group discussions showed that participants prioritized training for students and instructors, standardized procedures for disclosing AI use, and stronger institutional support. Participants also wanted greater involvement in GenAI-related decision-making. They described the policy design process as a way to engage with multiple perspectives and the inherent trade-offs involved in governing AI use. This study offers pedagogical insights into how policy co-design activities can surface student values, concerns, and sensemaking about GenAI in educational contexts.
Study at a glance
- Question: What do students prioritize when co-designing course policies for generative AI, and how do they view the process?
- Setting and data: Student artifacts and group discussions from students co-designing a course policy.
- Method: Analysis of student artifacts and group discussions during a guided inquiry activity (exploratory study).
Why it matters
As student use of generative AI increases, educators face growing questions about how to support learning while addressing ethical and institutional concerns.
Key findings
- In a course policy co-design activity, students prioritized training for instructors and students, standardized AI disclosure procedures, and stronger institutional support.
- Students expressed a desire for greater involvement in decision-making related to generative AI.
- Students reported that the policy design process helped them engage with multiple perspectives and navigate the trade-offs of governing AI use.
Summary drafted with AI from the paper’s abstract and may contain errors. See the full paper for details.
What is the application?
Who is the user?
Who age?
Why use AI?
Study design
