This study investigates how instructors think about their roles and responsibilities to students through their course AI policies and makes recommendations on AI policies that are more learning-oriented and could guide students toward healthier AI usage instead.
Abstract
While generative AI tools are directly changing how undergraduate computer science is learned and taught, they are also reshaping the relationships between instructors and students. In contrast to existing tool-oriented research on how instructors view and adopt AI, this study investigates how instructors think about their roles and responsibilities to students through their course AI policies. Based on 13 semi-structured interviews with CS instructors in the US, we found that while instructors recognize that AI tools could harm student learning, AI policies primarily seek to AI-proof assessments without directly addressing student learning. Although policies such as switching to paper exams can preserve assessment integrity in the short term, instructors report extra burden of policing student AI use behaviors and worsening relationships with students. Based on the experiences of several interviewees, we make recommendations on AI policies that are more learning-oriented and could guide students toward healthier AI usage instead.
It is argued that AI self-efficacy, characterized as a student’s confidence in their capacity to employ AI ethically and efficiently, constitutes a substantial determinant and the focus of instruction should transition from a “one-size-fits-all” approach to tailored interventions designed to enhance student empowerment.
H. Herianto, Eko Wahyudi, Andi Jusmiana et al.· Knowledge Management & E...· 0 citations
It is argued that programming should be treated not only as a technical skill but also as a sociological practice that enables students to fully participate in computational inquiry while engaging critically and ethically.
Maria C. Ramos, Fan-Wei Liang· Teaching sociology· 0 citations
This paper begins from the author's own practice and observations among colleagues, then examines three sets of questions raised by faculty AI use that have not yet been adequately engaged in the nursing literature.
A context is established in which reflective classroom surveys can help teachers implement process-based grading structures to empower students in their growth as authentic learners instead of defaulting to passive users of AI.
Erik N. Powel· Journal of Education and Lea...· 0 citations
A three-week midterm project embedded in an undergraduate “AI-for-all” course investigated whether AI literacy can be taught to undergrads, and shows any user how to test an AI system rather than trust it blindly.
Amarda Shehu, Adonyas Ababu, Asma Akbary et al.· Communications of the ACM· 0 citations
Reflections in engineering are a fruitful tool for encouraging lifelong learning and provide instructors with insight into how to adapt the learning environment to meet students' needs. However, reflections are impractical for large classes. This research explores the use of a latent Dirichlet allocation model to automatically classify students' design reflections, thereby improving the efficacy of their reviews. The model showed promising quantitative performance, but from a human reviewer's perspective, it lacked interpretability. The contradicting results encouraged a reflective discussion of the potential misuses and risks of artificial intelligence (AI), both within and outside the classroom, without a qualitative review. Based on the authors' experiences and lessons from this study, this paper advocates for professional engineering licensure bodies to modernize policies to encourage thoughtful, rigorous evaluation of AI models before deployment. This article was written to encourage engineering educators to utilize AI critically and responsibly.
Brian Macdonald, Sister Libby Osgood, Christopher Power· Proceedings of the Canadian...· 0 citations