To access a PDF version, click here.

Key findings

  • Overall, institutions expressed highly positive sentiments toward the use of GenAI across institutional types.
  • Sentiment varied across stakeholder groups.
    • Guidelines for administrators and faculty tended to reflect more positive sentiment.
    • Guidelines for researchers and students showed lower sentiment scores, suggesting a more cautious tone. 
  • Institutions tailored their guidance to the responsibilities of different stakeholders.
    • Faculty: 
      • Syllabus statements for GenAI use
      • Setting and communicating course policy regarding the use of GenAI
      • Redesigning assignments and assessments
      • What is GenAI?
      • Using AI detection tools
      • Incorporating GenAI in teaching
      • Ethical use of GenAI 
    • Students:
      • Academic integrity
      • Checking with instructors 
      • Limitations and risks of GenAI 
    • Researchers:
      • Limitations and risks of GenAI
      • Recommendations for the responsible and ethical use of GenAI in research
      • Staying up to date with GenAI uses and guidelines 
    • Administrators:
      • Privacy and data protection
      • Capabilities of GenAI
      • Limitations of GenAI 

Purpose and context

The study aimed to:
  • Examine institutional guidelines for the use of GenAI in teaching, learning, research, and administration.
  • Identify common themes across stakeholder groups (faculty, students, researchers, staff, and administrators).

Unlike previous studies that focused primarily on assessment-related guidance, this study provides a comprehensive analysis of GenAI guidelines for all major stakeholder groups.

Key findings

  • Overall, institutions expressed highly positive sentiments toward the use of GenAI across institutional types.
  • Sentiment varied across stakeholder groups.
    • Guidelines for administrators and faculty tended to reflect more positive sentiment.
    • Guidelines for researchers and students showed lower sentiment scores, suggesting a more cautious tone. 
  • Institutions tailored their guidance to the responsibilities of different stakeholders.
    • Faculty: 
      • Syllabus statements for GenAI use
      • Setting and communicating course policy regarding the use of GenAI
      • Redesigning assignments and assessments
      • What is GenAI?
      • Using AI detection tools
      • Incorporating GenAI in teaching
      • Ethical use of GenAI 
    • Students:
      • Academic integrity
      • Checking with instructors 
      • Limitations and risks of GenAI 
    • Researchers:
      • Limitations and risks of GenAI
      • Recommendations for the responsible and ethical use of GenAI in research
      • Staying up to date with GenAI uses and guidelines 
    • Administrators:
      • Privacy and data protection
      • Capabilities of GenAI
      • Limitations of GenAI 

Recommendations for practice

  • Develop stakeholder-specific guidance that addresses the distinct roles and responsibilities of faculty, students, researchers, staff, and administrators.
  • Regularly review and update policies to keep pace with rapidly evolving GenAI technologies and emerging best practices.
  • Communicate policies clearly and consistently through centralized resources, training, and regular updates.
  • Support faculty in developing and communicating course-specific GenAI policies, including expectations for acceptable use.
  • Prioritize privacy, transparency, and responsible use by protecting sensitive data and requiring disclosure of GenAI use in academic and administrative work. 
References

An, Y., & Yu, J.H., & James, S. (2025). Investigating the higher education institutions’ guidelines and policies regarding the use of generative AI in teaching, learning, research, and administration. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 22, Article number: 10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-02500507-3