Published Content
Artificial Intelligence in a Writing Intensive Lifespan Development Course: Rates and Functions of Student Usage
Ashlie Lester and Wenting Sun
Artificial intelligence (AI) has transformed usual processes of higher education, including teaching with writing. Grounded in sociocultural theory, this study considers the role of generative AI (GenAI) within students’ zone of proximal development, where learning is supported through scaffolding that bridges what students can do independently and what they can achieve with guidance. Students (n = 114) enrolled in a writing intensive, lifespan development course in Fall 2024 completed eight writing assignments and disclosed any GenAI use; specifically, they could submit no more than a paragraph of their writing to a GenAI tool to solicit feedback that could be applied throughout the papers. Required AI disclosure statements revealed infrequent GenAI use, with only 22 unique users of GenAI for less than 8% of the assignments. Thematic analysis of the disclosure statements revealed three themes of use: writing mechanics, higher-order writing concerns, and content understanding. Despite students reporting that GenAI feedback was helpful, the impact on writing scores and final grades were mixed. Findings highlight the complex role of GenAI as a potential scaffolding learning assistant and suggest implications for instructors seeking to strategically incorporate GenAI into teaching with writing.
AI Conceptualization and Policy Permissibility
Zea Miller, Kashish Sachdeva, and Jake Walker
When universities create AI policies, they often conceptualize AI as something, such as a tool or a resource. This study questions whether such policies are affected by how they envision AI. In other words, is the permissible a function of conceptualization? To answer, R1 university policies were rated independently by three raters on two axes: conceptualization and permissibility. When visualized, the ratings clearly show that while AI qua TOOL does not inherently attach either to the restrive or permissive, AI qua RESOURCE does not attach to the restrictive. Ultimately, this study shows that universities are unlikely at this time to conceptualize AI as a resource and simultaneously ban it.
Examining Student Opinions about Artificial Intelligence at the University of Florida
Julia House
As artificial intelligence (AI) has advanced, it has become a prominent consideration in the academic world, sparking a range of differing viewpoints on its appropriate use. While AI in education holds great potential, it also presents limitations and ethical implications to be considered. Understanding student perspectives is valuable in the conversation about AI, and especially important in guiding its integration into academic settings, such as the shaping of academic policies. This paper serves to explore UF undergraduate student opinions on AI, revealing that they are largely open to the permissive use of AI in their work. Additionally, the results of this research suggest that while UF undergraduate students believe AI is valuable and enhances their work, many students desire clear expectations for its usage. Ultimately, this paper offers insight into the overarching opinions that UF undergraduate students hold regarding AI in the current moment.