Investigating the Higher Education Institutions’ Guidelines and Policies regarding the Use of Generative AI in Teaching, Learning, Research, and Administration
- Yunjo An
- Jan 19
- 3 min read
Updated: 6 days ago
This study examined the guidelines issued by the top 50 U.S. higher education institutions regarding the use of generative AI (GenAI) in their academic and administrative activities. While prior research has often focused on assessment policies or faculty-oriented guidelines, this study took a broader institutional perspective by reviewing all available GenAI-related guidelines addressed to key stakeholder groups, including faculty, students, researchers, staff, and administrators. This comprehensive review offers new insights into how higher education institutions are navigating the opportunities and challenges associated with the rapid adoption ofGenAI tools.
Research Questions
The study was guided by the following questions:
What topics are most prevalent in the GenAI guidelines issued by the top 50 U.S.universities?
How do sentiments in the GenAI guidelines from these universities vary based oninstitution characteristics and target audience?
What specific themes do these leading U.S. universities address for different stakeholders(faculty, students, researchers, staff, and administrators) in their GenAI guidelines?
Findings 1: Prevalent Topics and Sentiments in GenAI Guidelines
Analysis identified four core topics shaping GenAI discourse across institutions: (1) integration of GenAI in learning and assessment, (2) GenAI in visual, interactive, and multimodal media, (3) security and ethical considerations in GenAI, and (4) GenAI in academic integrity. Sentiment analysis revealed generally positive attitudes toward GenAI among institutions, regardless of institution type. However, tone differed notably by target audience. Guidelines directed at administrators and faculty were especially positive, highlighting the benefits and potential of GenAI. In contrast, the guidelines for students and researchers adopted a more cautious tone, reflecting efforts to prevent potential misuse.
Findings 2: Stakeholder-Specific Guidelines
Guidelines were categorized by target audience and analyzed separately to capture the distinct approaches taken toward different stakeholder groups.
Guidelines for Faculty
Almost all the universities provided faculty with guidelines for the use of GenAI. Seven major themes emerged: (1) Syllabus statements for GenAI use, (2) setting and communicating course policy regarding the use of GenAI, (3) redesigning assignments and assessments, (4) what is GenAI?, (5) using AI detection tools, (6) incorporating GenAI in teaching, and (7) ethical use of GenAI.
Faculty were encouraged to establish clear policies on acceptable and prohibited uses of GenAI and to communicate these expectations explicitly to students, primarily through course syllabi. Many institutions advised instructors to redesign assessments to emphasize authentic, process-oriented, and higher-order thinking tasks that would be less vulnerable to inappropriate AI use. Interestingly, universities generally did not recommend using AI detection tools, noting the limitations of current detections technologies.
Guidelines for Students
Three major themes were identified in the student guidelines: (1) academic
integrity, (2) checking with instructors, and (3) limitations and risks of GenAI. In alignment with faculty guidance, the student guidelines emphasized that course policies vary and that it is students’ responsibility to understand and follow the expectations set by each instructor. Students were consistently advised to review their course syllabi and consult with their instructors before using GenAI tools.
Guidelines for Researchers
Three major themes emerged from the researcher guidelines: (1) limitations and risks of GenAI, (2) recommendations for the responsible and ethical use of GenAI in research, and (3) staying up to date with GenAI uses and guidelines. Overall, the guidelines adopted a more cautious tone, advising researchers to remain informed about emerging AI tools as well as institutional rules and regulations governing their use.
Guidelines for Staff and Administrators
While many universities provided guidelines for faculty and students, fewer than 20% offered GenAI guidelines specifically for researchers, staff, and administrators. Three primary themes were identified within staff and administrator guidelines: (1) privacy and data protection, (2) capabilities of GenAI, and (3) limitations of GenAI. Privacy and data protection were emphasized across all stakeholder guidelines, with particular focus in staff guidance. Staff and administrators were advised not to enter any confidential or sensitive information into GenAI tools.
Key Recommendations for Higher Education Institutions
Findings from this study underscore the importance of developing customized GenAI guidelines that address the distinct responsibilities and needs of varied stakeholder groups. One-size-fits-all policies may fail to capture the diverse contexts in which GenAI is used across teaching, research, and administration. The study also emphasized the need for GenAI guidelines and policies to remain flexible and continually updated to keep pace with technological advancements. Many universities noted that their guidelines and policies are constantly evolving alongside technological advancements. The evolving nature of GenAI guidelines and policies presents both challenges and opportunities for higher education stakeholders. Clear communication regarding updates to GenAI policies is therefore essential to ensure shared understanding and responsible adoption across campuses.
Comments