Overview
The release of ChatGPT on November 22, 2022 and the subsequent continuing rapid development of generative AI tools have provided students and faculty with services that, drawing from a training database that contains a massive collection of human knowledge can generate generate writtem, audio, image, and video response to queries. These tools have the potential to dramatically change the way we work and live. They also provide some substantial benefits and challenges to how we engage in educational processes.
A primary benefit resulting from the widespread availability of AI tools is that it provides students with personalized support that is available 24 hours a day. Students arrive at college with diverse educational backgrounds and substantial differences in preparation for college-level coursework. AI tools can be used to level the playing field, allowing students to get the specific support they need when they need it.
One of the challenges facing educators, though, is that generative AI tools can provide relatively high quality responses to virtuallyh all types of traditional online assessments and there is no definitive way of distinguishing material created by AI tools and humans, despite the claims of the creators of a growing number of AI detection services.
The initial reaction of educators top the use of AI tools was to attempt to ban any use of AI in their classes. AI tools, though, are already being widely adopted in virtually all of the occupations to which college students aspire.
The challenge facing educators is to prepare students to be able to thrive in a world in which AI tools are ubuiquitous. Our graduates must be prepared to use AI tools ethically and productively if they wish to be employable. They also, though, must develop the knowledge and analytical skills to be able to use these tools effectively.
Course design and AI
AI course policies
There is no single course policy that is appropriate for all courses or for all disciplines. In determining what types of student AI usage is appropriate for your class, you should reflect on the learning objectives of your class, the ways in which AI tools are being used (or are likely to be used in the near future) in your discipline, and the level of skills that your students bring into your class. Consider ways in which AI usage might support student learning and ways in which this usage could harm student learning and skill acquisition and construct policies that are most conducive to supporting learning. The level and types of appropriate AI usage may vary from assignment to assignment.
Every course should contain a syllabus statement addressing what ways in which AI usage is (or is not) allowed in the course. To help ensure student buy-in, it can be useful to co-create an AI policy with your students at the start of the semester. One useful strategy for this is to have students construct possible AI policies in small groups and then build a policy following a whole class discussion.
Students do not always remember everything written in their course syllabus, so we striongly recommend that each assignment include a statement of ways in which AI tools may (or may not) be used in completing assignments (more on this below).
Examples of course policies and syllabus statements
- Creating your course policy on AI - Standford University
- ChatGPT and Generative AI Tools: Sample Syllabus Policy Statements - The University of Texas at Austin Center for Teaching and Learning
- AI Course Policy Examples - CELT - University of Kentucky
Assessment and academic integrity
Academic integrity issues are more common when students are faced with high-stakes assessment activities that do not seem seem to have intrinsic value in terms of the development of skills and knowledge that will be needed in future educational and career plans. Among the strategies can be used to support academic integrity are:
- authentic assessment techniques
- low-stakes assessments
- alternative assessment approaches
- proctored assessments
- evaluating process rather than product
Authentic assessment
Academic integrity concerns can be reduced by using authentic assessment activities that are recognized as being relevant to the students goals. Faculty are encouraged to use the Transparency in Learning and Teaching (TILT) approach developed by Mary-Ann Winklemes to provide transparent connections between assessments and course learning outcomes. When using the TILT approach, faculty include with every assessment a brief description of:
- the purpose of the assessment,
- a clear description of the task (including a rubric and/or exemplars of high-quality work), and
- the criteria used to evaluate the work (possibly including a rubric).
Useful resources on TILT:
- TILT Higher Ed website
- A transparent assessment template
- Mary-Ann Winkelmes (2023). Transparency in Teaching and Learning. Tea for Teaching podcast. Episode 290. May 24.
Low-stakes assessment
The use of low-stakes assessment, particularly when students have the option of multiple assessment attempts without penalty, reduces the pressure on students to achieve high grades on initial assessment attempts, thereby reducing the incentive to engage in academic dishonesty.
Alternative assessment approaches
Students have been exposed to high-stakes assessments throughout their K-12 education and their ability to progress successfully has been linked to the grades they receive,m rather than to their learning. Alternative assessment approaches are designed to shift the focus from maximizing grades to maximizing learning. Among the mnost commonly used alternative assessment strategies are:
- standards-based assessment
- specifications grading
- contract grading
- labor-based grading
- ungrading
Proctored Assessments
Many faculty are returning to in-person proctored assessments, particularly for high-stakes assessments in fields where licensing is required. A growing number of colleges and university systems are developing networks of locations (including other colleges, local libraries, etc) in which in-person assessment is completed. Oral exams are also making a comeback in smaller classes, but do not scale very well.
Evaluating Process Rather than Product
This approach involves the use of scaffolded assignments and reflection assignments in which the student regularly reflects on the process of their learning. Under this approach, students are evaluated by using student reflections (combined with work products) to evaluate metacognitive and skill development
AI and teaching resources
Books
- Bowen, J. A., & Watson, C. E. (2024). Teaching with AI: A practical guide to a new era of human learning. JHU Press. (eBook option through Penfield Library)
- Levy, D. and Angela Pérez Albertos (2024). Teaching Effectively with ChatGPT: A practical guide to creating better learning experiences for your students in less time. LSC Communications
- Mollick, E. (2024). Co-Intelligence. Random House UK.
- Skrabut, Stan (2023). 80 Ways to Use ChatGPT in the Classroom. Stan Skrabut.
Blogs
Local workshop video recordings
We've created a playlist of all SUNY-Oswego workshop recordings related to AI since January 2023.
Tea for Teaching podcast episodes focused on AI
2026
- 435. Yakut Gazi, Marina Amini, and Van Davis - Insights from the Field - March 4
- 431. Tim Curry – A Curated AI Framework - February 4
- 428. Lew Ludwig and Todd Zakrajsek - The Science of Learning Meets AI - January 14
2025
- 425. Anna Mills - Authentic Voice in the Age of AI - December 24
- 424. José Antonio Bowen - Teaching with AI - December 17
- 423. Tara Chklovski - Using AI for Project-Based Learning - December 10
- 416. Dan Levy and Angela Perez Albertos - Teaching More Effectively with ChatGPT - October 22
- 413. Josh Eyler, Emily Pitts Donahoe, and Marc Watkins - Faculty Perspectives on AI - October 1.
- 409. Dave Ghidiu - Vibe Coding - September 3
- 406. Kaija Hoyt - AI: A Student Perspective - August 13
- 401. Loy Gross - Making Technology Fashionable - July 9
- 399. Nathan Pritt - Improve Course Design Using AI - June 25
- 398. Stephanie Pritchard and Racheal Fest - Multicampus AI Initiative - June 18
- 394. Camille Huggins, Yolanda Carlos, and Orlando Saiz - Pacific Oaks' Approach to AI - May 21
- 388. Tricia Bertram Gallant and David A. Rettinger - The Opposite of Cheating - April 9
- 386. Michelle Miller - Critical Thinking in the Age of AI - March 26
- 385. John Warner - More than Words - March 19
- 380. JeVaughn Lancaster - Chatbots to Support Learning - February 12
- 375. Liz Norell, Sheri Restauri, and Thomas J. Tobin - UDL, Access, and AI - January 8
- 370. Betsy Barre - Why Don't Students Read - December 4
2024
- 367. Dan Levy and Angela Prez - Teaching Effectively with Chat GPT - November 13.
- 353. Marc Watkins. Beyond ChatGPT - August 7.
- 347. Todd Zakrajsek. CATs and AI - June 26.
- 332. Chancellor John B. King - Challenges and Opportunities - March 13
- 319. Mohammad Tajvarpour - AI in the Curriculum - December 13
2023
- 311. Marc Watkins - Upskilling in AI - October 18.
- 309. Michelle Miller - Preparing Students for an AI Future - October 4.
- 305. Stan Skrabut - 80 Ways to Use ChatGPT in the Classroom - September 6.
- 304. Don Donelson (2023). ChatGPT Inspired Course Redesign - August 30.
- 296. Betsy Barre (2023). ChatGPT Chat. July 5.
- 274. Robert Cummings and Marc Watson (2023). ChatGPT. February 1.
People to follow on social media
- Betsy Barre - LinkedIn
- Anna Mills - - BlueSky - LinkedIn
- Marc Watkins - X - BlueSky - LinkedIn
- Anna Mills' BlueSky Starter Pack on AI and writing, AI in education, and AI regulation
Other resources:
- Creative and critical engagement with AI in education - AI Pedagogy Project, metaLAB at Harvard
- Aaron et. al. (2024). Optimizing AI in Higher Education: SUNY FACT2 Guide, 2nd edition.
- Mitchell, Emily - Generative AI at SUNY Oswego - A Penfield Library LibGuide on AI at SUNY-Oswego