|
|
Posted By Katie Hamilton, Joyce University of Nursing and Health Sciences,
Tuesday, January 21, 2025
Updated: Friday, January 17, 2025
|
Setting Expectations for Student Use
Authors: Katie Hamilton, Chief of Staff – Office of the Provost, and Jonathan Hill, MD, PhD, Faculty Training and Development Specialist.
Artificial Intelligence (AI) has brought unique challenges and opportunities to higher education. Like institutions nationwide, faculty and leaders at Joyce University of Nursing and Health Sciences (Joyce) sought to develop a policy that ensured responsible
and ethical student use of the emerging and evolving technology. In this post, we share the process our university took to develop the Artificial Intelligence Use Policy and Procedure for students, and what’s next for AI policy.
Artificial Intelligence Position Statement
Prior to the policy work, a Joyce Artificial Intelligence taskforce contributed to the development of the following statement, which guided the work to follow.
At Joyce University of Nursing and Health Sciences, we recognize that Artificial Intelligence (AI) represents a transformative force with potential to shape the future. As an Institution dedicated to education and innovation, we are committed to harnessing
the power of AI in a way that aligns with the University’s mission and vision.
As guided by the University’s values, we will navigate the possibilities that AI presents, striving to create an academic and healthcare education landscape that is inclusive,
empowering, and enriched by the responsible and ethical use of AI.
AI Use Policy Development
- Policy Purpose
Prior to the AI Use Policy, Joyce faculty observed an uptick in student coursework submitted that reflected the use AI for completion. Without clear guidelines, faculty and administration lacked a complete toolbox
to support responsible and ethical student AI use. The taskforce developed the policy to provide clear expectations for students’ acceptable and unacceptable use of AI and an avenue for reporting violations.
- Artificial Intelligence Use Policy
Our policy authors developed guidelines for the acceptable use of AI for student coursework while ensuring faculty remained empowered to guide the use of AI in their courses and to reduce
sole dependence on AI percentage reports provided by plagiarism checkers (e.g., Turnitin). The policy outlines three categories of AI use cases: Authorized Use, Unauthorized Use, and Prohibited Use, as summarized below.
- Authorized Use
- Faculty permission is granted to use AI in the course.
- Use of AI to edit and/or expand upon student authored work.
- Use of AI to generate ideas (not content) towards the application of coursework.
- Use of AI to assist in the organization and collection of research related materials.
- Unauthorized Use
- Absence of faculty permission to use AI in the course.
- Absence of student contribution in the coursework.
- Absence of the acknowledgement of AI use.
- Prohibited Use
- Input of documents or information proprietary to the University.
- Input of identifying or confidential information without permission.
- Policy Enforcement
We have had success at Joyce including the AI Use Policy violation reporting within the Student Code of Conduct reporting process to ensure equitable, consistent sanctions and effective support for faculty and students. The authors accomplished
policy accountability through the procedure below.
Students that violate the Artificial Intelligence Use Policy will be considered in violation of the Student Code of Conduct Policy, specifically the Academic Integrity Standards, and will be subject to disciplinary action in accordance
with the Student Code of Conduct Policy and Procedure as published in University Catalog.
What’s next for AI Policy at Joyce?
- AI Use Policy Effectiveness Evaluation
Joyce recently implemented a policy evaluation process for recently published policies. The AI Use Policy has been in place for a semester and is ready to undergo this evaluation to inform
any revisions. Through this evaluation, we will also explore additional AI policy needs, AI governance frameworks, and consider broadening the policy scope to address emerging technologies and applications using AI.
- Faculty AI Training and Education
The Joyce Faculty Academy will begin offering a course on AI in healthcare and education to increase AI literacy at Joyce.
Recognition: A special thank you to the policy authors, Dr. Jonathan Hill, MD, PhD, Faculty Training and Development Specialist, and Tricia Kingsley, Director of Legal Affairs and Associate Counsel, for their commitment to the development
of the Artificial Intelligence Use Policy.
Tags:
AI
Artificial Intelligence
Katie Hamilton
policy development
students
technology
Permalink
|
|
|
Posted By Jessica Teets CCEP, Purdue University,
Monday, January 15, 2024
Updated: Thursday, January 11, 2024
|
Articles on Topics that May Affect Your Policies To kick off 2024, the Blog Committee shares some of the articles they have been reading related to policy administration in higher education. Academic Integrity A Brief Guide to How Colleges Adjudicate Plagiarism Cases
By Beth McMurtrie, The Chronicle of Higher Education, January 3, 2024 Administration 3 policy developments college leaders should keep an eye on this year
By Natalie Schwarz, Higher Ed Dive, January 10, 2024 Biden admin dives into next round of higher education regulations
By Michael Stratford, Politico Weekly Education Newsletter, January 8, 2024 Education Dept. Outlines Possible Changes in Accreditation, Distance Education, Other Rules
By Katherine Knott, Inside Higher Ed, January 3, 2024 AI Creating an AI Policy for Your Marketing Communications Team
By Georgy Cohen, Inside Higher Ed, January 9, 2024 How Will Copyright Law and Plagiarism Change in the Age of GenAI?
By Dan Lohrmann, Government Technology, January 8, 2024 Equity, Inclusion, and Accessibility After Months of Political Pressure and a Failed Vote, Wisconsin’s Regents Approve Deal on DEI
By Erin Gretzinger, The Chronicle of Higher Education, December 14, 2023 Better integration policies for international students needed at universities
By Benjamin Maiangwa, University Affairs, October 10, 2023 Judge suspends adoption of pro-Palestinian policy by McGill student union
By Jesse Feith, The Montreal Gazette, November 22, 2023 University of Rochester Creates New Digital Accessibility Policy
By news staff of Government Technology, January 5, 2024 University principal slams Quebec’s proposed French language policy
By Isaac Lamoureux, True North, December 24, 2023 UPEI releases 5-year plan for fixing problems highlighted in scathing review
By Carolyn Ryan, CBC, January 3, 2024 Will New House Bill Help Pregnant Students?
By Katherine Knott, Inside Higher Ed, January 9, 2024 Free Speech Can a simple procedural reform fix universities’ speech policies?
By John Hasnas, The Hill, December 29, 2023 Institutional neutrality policy adopted at Laurentian University
By Heidi Ulrichsen, Sudbury.com, December 31, 2023 The Ford government is ignoring its own campus free speech policy
By Creso Sá, University Affairs, November 28, 2023 Human Resources DOL independent contractor final rule announced, will take effect March 11
By Ryan Golden, Higher Ed Dive, January 10, 2024 Illinois becomes third state to enact paid time off for all workers
By Lauren Warnecke, WGLT.org, January 4, 2024 These universities have embraced remote work—and they’re seeing some big wins
By Alcino Donadel, University Business, October 10, 2023
Tags:
AI
equity
free speech
HR
Jessica Teets
laws
regulations
Permalink
| Comments (0)
|
|
|
Posted By Sara Gigeroff, University of New Brunswick,
Monday, April 10, 2023
Updated: Thursday, April 6, 2023
|
Articles on Topics that May Affect Your PoliciesDue to the popularity of our previous Policy in the News post, the Blog Committee wanted to take this opportunity to share recent policy-related higher education articles ahead of the ACUPA Annual Conference. Administration
Guidance for an Often Thankless Task: Revising the Faculty Handbook
By Laura L. Behling, Inside Higher Ed, April 4, 2023 AI in Academia
AI Tools Don’t Have to be the Enemy of Teaching and Learning
By Gavan P.L. Watson & Sarah Elaine Eaton, University Affairs, February 17, 2023 Canadian Universities Crafting ChatGPT Policies as French School Bans AI Program
By Aaron D’Andrea, Global News, February 1, 2023
Campus Safety
West Virginia Governor Signs Campus Carry Gun Bill
By John Raby, AP News, March 1, 2023
Equity, Diversity, Inclusion
Free Speech vs. Hate Speech
By Safia Abdulahi, Inside Higher Ed, April 4, 2023 Harvard Grad Union Members Mixed on New University-Wide Policies on Bullying and Discrimination
By Julia A. Maciejak, The Harvard Crimson, April 5, 2023 How EDI Policies are Failing International Students
By Karine Coen-Sanchez, University Affairs, January 24, 2023 The Ohio Education Bill that Stands Against Diversity Training—and China
By Alcino Donadel, University Business, March 15, 2023
Health and Wellness
New ‘Disconnecting from Work’ Policies Aren’t Enough to Tackle the Problem of Work-life Balance
By Michael Rancic, University Affairs, August 8, 2023 What Higher Ed's Paid Parental-Leave Policies Look Like
By Megan Zahneis, The Chronicle of Higher Education, March 28, 2023 Yale University’s New Mental Health Policy Raises Discussions Among BW Communities
By Madeline Dwyer, The Exponent, March 23, 2023
Information Technology
Education Espionage: FSA “Secret Shoppers” to Monitor Higher Ed for Unethical Practices
By Alcino Donadel, University Business, March 15, 2023 How IT Departments Can Shape Acceptable Use Policies in Higher Ed
By Alexandra Shimalla, EdTech: Focus on Higher Education, March 29, 2023 U.S. Department of Education Announces Updated Data Security Expectation for Postsecondary Institutions
By Sarah Pheasant, Jonathan Tarnow (Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP), J.D. Supra, March 31, 2023
Tenure and Recruitment
Florida University System Approves New Tenure Policy, Spurning Faculty Critics
By Jeremy Bauer-Wolf, Higher Ed Dive, March 30, 2023 Texas Senate’s Priority Bills on Higher Ed Would End Tenure, Diversity Policies
By Kate McGee, The Texas Tribune, March 10, 2023
Tags:
acceptable use
administration
AI
articles
Canada
ChatGPT
compliance
data security
diversity
EDI
equity
Florida
free speech
health
inclusion
IT
leave
news
parental leave
policy
policy administration
policy development
policy process
recruitment
Sara Gigeroff
tenure
Texas
wellness
West Virginia
work-life balance
Permalink
| Comments (0)
|
|
|
Posted By Teresa Raetz, Georgia Gwinnett College,
Monday, April 1, 2019
|
The Impact of Automation and AI
One aspect of my job is to research emerging issues for my campus and make recommendations for how we should be preparing for them. This post evolved from a policy and practice brief I recently wrote for my institution on the role of automation and artificial intelligence (AI) on the economy and the subsequent challenges for how we prepare students and operate as an organization.
While campus traditions and cultures vary, most of us have experienced—and currently work in—an educational system that prepares workers for an Industrial Revolution-based economy. Our modern economy, however, is changing in ways that will likely affect both the way we prepare students and our own workplaces; one of the drivers of that change is automation and AI.
Most people are familiar with the impact of automation on factory and blue-collar jobs that began to speed up in the 1970s. What many don’t appreciate is that increasing numbers of white-collar professions, such as radiology, accounting, stock trading, paralegal work, and even some aspects of journalism, have already been significantly influenced by machines that can do the work as effectively as humans.[i] Yes, some of the news stories you are currently reading are written by nonhumans. A 2013 Oxford University study predicted that nearly half of all jobs will be in danger of automation in the next two decades,[ii] and a 2015 McKinsey report predicted that 45% of all work can be automated by technology that’s currently available.[iii]A survey found that most researchers believe that AI systems will probably (i.e., more than 50% likelihood) achieve the ability to work at the same level as humans beginning around 2040.[iv] Even more moderate predictions see a large impact on the workplace, with 9% of the workforce being displaced.[v]
Skeptics say that the world economy has previously experienced several major technological disruptions—such as the power loom that displaced weavers and the car that eliminated most of the relevant products and services for horse-drawn carriages—and each time the economy recovered as people reskilled. Several experts say, however, that the disruption caused by AI is different because it is exponential in its ability to change and adjust.[vi]
Even if the more dire predictions don’t come to pass, it’s certain that AI and automation will impact our lives as workers, as well as those of our graduates. While it’s unlikely that instruction and service units will be completely automated, technology is currently in use that automates important functions like grading, tutoring, and answering basic inquiries from students.
Because so much is unknown about the impact of AI on education, there are more questions than answers at this point, but it’s important, nevertheless, that campuses begin to engage these coming changes and, as part of that process, give thoughtful consideration to what they mean for our own campuses as workplaces. Has your institution begun thinking about these issues? Has your institution begun using AI to perform functions that were previously done by humans, such as chatbots to answer basic student questions? In an era of scarce budget resources, what stance, if any, does your campus take on preserving the jobs of human workers versus using technology that can perform some or all of their functions?What policy and ethical implications do you foresee, as AI becomes more integrated into the work of education?
[ii] Frey, C. B. & Osborne, M. A. (2017). The future of employment: How susceptible are jobs to computerization? Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 114, 254 – 280.
[iv] Müller, V. & Bostrom, N. (2014). Future progress in artificial intelligence: A survey of expert opinion. In V. C. Müller (ed.), Fundamental Issues of Artificial Intelligence (555 – 574). Berlin: Springer.
[v] Arntz, M. Gregory, T, & Zierahn, U. (2016). The risk of automation for jobs in OECD countries: A comparative analysis. OECD Social, Employment and Migration Working Papers, 189. Paris: OECD Publishing. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/5jlz9h56dvq7-en
Tags:
AI
Artificial intelligence
automation
change
chatbot
workplace
Permalink
| Comments (1)
|
|
Blog Home
All Blogs
RSS