Note: This is a living document. Humber will continue to adapt this resource as new topics and issues arise due to the rapidly changing landscape of Generative Artificial Intelligence (GIA).
Overview
Artificial intelligence (AI) systems have become powerful tools that we use regularly in our professional and personal lives. Spelling and grammar checkers, auto correct with predictive language cues as we text, automatic live captions, or written transcriptions when we livestream are just some of the ways in which artificial intelligence makes our lives and our work faster and easier.
Emerging generative AI (GAI) tools like ChatGPT offer groundbreaking opportunities to harness technology in new and exciting ways. In education, these tools present new possibilities that are challenging the status quo and driving teaching and learning innovation. Given the capabilities of AI applications, we also need to set clear guidelines on how to use AI responsibly, ethically, and productively in academic settings, both to uphold the principles of academic integrity and to prepare learners for AI integration in their future careers.
What is Generative Artificial Intelligence (GAI)?
Generative AI is a specialized area within the field of Artificial Intelligence (AI) that incorporates Large Language Models (LLM) and employs algorithms that can replicate human generated text, code, music, images, and multi-media by processing extensive datasets and then predicting an expected output based on human prompts. Tools that employ Generative AI, such as ChatGPT, are becoming increasingly accessible and have already begun to profoundly influence teaching, learning, educational methods, and content.
Generative AI in the Classroom
We encounter disruptive innovation all the time. The advent of the personal computer, the Internet, Google Search, and Wikipedia were all transformative to the way we work, teach, and study. While such innovations and technological advancements can be disruptive to your teaching practice and how you assess your learners, incorporating them into your teaching practice is also an opportunity to prepare your learners to live and thrive in a changing world.
Guiding Resources
The intention of these guiding resources is to offer a starting point for instructors to consider the potential uses of generative AI in teaching and learning prior to the start of teaching courses at Humber Polytechnic. More importantly they provide an opportunity to think about and reflect on how we teach.
Humber Polytechnic’s Statement on Generative Artificial Intelligence (GAI)
As a community of higher learning, Humber:
- Embraces the integration of AI generative tools in ethical, equitable, and constructive ways in support of teaching and learning.
- Commits to supporting students to develop the digital fluency skills to participate effectively, responsibly, and ethically in AI-enhanced workplaces.
- Recognizes that integration of AI will vary across disciplines and will require context-responsive approaches.
- Acknowledges that professors have discretion to decide how AI can be applied in a particular course in ways that enhance student learning. This involves the provision of explicit guidance for students in assessment and assignment instructions on how AI tools are to be used and cited.
- Contends that un-cited and/or other unauthorized use of AI in assessments and assignments constitutes academic misconduct as defined in Humber’s Academic Regulations.
- Commits to polytechnic-wide consultation to develop supports for students and professors in the use of AI that is grounded in research/evidence-based best practices.
- Will continue to adapt and innovate in response to the rapid changes we will face as artificial intelligence continues to evolve.
Academic Integrity and Generative Artificial Intelligence (GAI)
Setting Expectations for GAI Use in Your Courses
Be explicit about your expectations for the course. Whether or not you decide to incorporate GAI into your course(s). It is important to make your expectations clear to your learners. The Polytechnic has developed some statements that can be used or adapted to help you formulate the message you want to relay to students about how GAI may or may not be used in your course. Feel free to adopt or adapt these statements for your course path or for specific assignments.
Sample Language for Critical Path and Assignments
Use of GAI not permitted
Students are not permitted to use generative AI in this course. In alignment with Humber Polytechnic Academic Regulations, Section 17.3 submitting academic work for assessment that was copied, purchased, or acquired from an unauthorized source is considered academic dishonesty/misconduct and is subject to the penalties outlined in Humber’s Academic Misconduct Sanctions Section 17.4. This includes work created by generative AI tools. Charges of academic dishonesty/ misconduct will be brought forward to the Associate Dean of your department.
Some Use of GAI is permitted for specific tasks or assignments.
Example One
Students may use generative AI in this course in accordance with the guidelines outlined for each assessment, and so long as the use of generative AI is referenced and cited following citation instructions given in the critical path. Use of generative AI outside assessment guidelines or without citation will constitute academic dishonesty/ misconduct. It is the student’s responsibility to be clear on the limitations for use for each assessment and to be clear on the expectations for citation and reference and to do so appropriately.
Example Two
Students may use generative AI for [editing/translating/outlining/brainstorming/revising] work throughout the course so long as the use of generative AI is referenced and cited following citation instructions given in the critical path. Use of generative AI outside the stated use of [editing/translating/outlining/brainstorming/revising] work without citation will constitute academic dishonesty/ misconduct. It is the student’s responsibility to be clear on the limitations for use and to be clear on the expectations for citation and reference and to do so appropriately.
Example Three
Students may freely use generative AI in this course so long as the use of generative AI is referenced and cited following citation instructions given in the critical path. Use of generative AI outside assessment guidelines or without citation will constitute academic dishonesty/ misconduct. It is the student’s responsibility to be clear on the expectations for citation and reference and to do so appropriately.
Unrestricted use of GAI
Students may use generative AI throughout this course in whatever way enhances their learning; no special documentation or citation is required. (McMaster University, 2023)
Fostering Digital Fluency Skills and Academic Integrity
Digital fluency has always been an important aspect of teaching and learning. We ask learners to cite their sources and critically evaluate them as a matter of course. Consider GAI an additional digital source that should (if you are permitting GAI use in your classroom) be both cited and critically evaluated for accuracy.
All content submitted by students for assessments must represent their own ideas, creations, and experiences. Content that is generated through any resources or artificial intelligence must be properly cited or acknowledged as directed by your course professor/instructor. Please refer to your professor/course instructor and/or assignment rubric for details about the acceptable use of content generated by artificial intelligence. (Jennie Miron et al., 2023)
How to Cite GAI Sources:
How to Critically Evaluate GAI Output:
Learners should approach Generative AI content with the understanding that while these technologies can produce content that seems to be accurate, it may not be.
It’s essential to consider the following:
Content Accuracy
Although AI models can generate grammatically correct text that may seem logical and informative, they can produce content that is misleading and/or incorrect. Always cross-verify AI generated content with trusted resources to ensure accuracy.
Bias Awareness
Generative AI can (and will) generate biased or skewed content. It is vital to critically evaluate the output for gender, racial, cultural, and ableist biases.
Ethical Considerations
Generative AI is powerful and can create content that seems incredibly human-like. This can lead to misuse, such as generating deepfakes or disseminating false information. As responsible learners, it’s crucial to understand and respect the ethical boundaries surrounding the use of these technologies.
Source Verification
Always verify the source of the information. Generative AI, including models like ChatGPT don’t generate information based on new data after their training cut-off. Furthermore, GAI is widely known to “hallucinate” meaning it will make things up and present the content as the truth.
Approaching Generative AI content with this critical perspective can help learners sift through the generated information more effectively, maximizing its potential as a learning tool while minimizing the risk of misinformation. (ChatGPT, 2023)
Sample Rubrics
I acknowledge the use of ChatGPT 4.0 to create sample analytic and holistic rubrics. The prompts included “Imagine you are a rubric generating robot who creates reliable and valid rubrics to assess critical thinking skills. You have been tasked with generating a rubric that evaluates students critical thinking skills and incorporates their use of generative AI. Create two holistic rubrics and two analytic rubrics to assess these skills.”
The output from these prompts was to provide examples of the kind of rubrics that could be used to assess the integration of generative AI in course assignments.
Assignment Rubric Incorporating AI Use as assignment Criteria
| Criteria | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Argument Structure | The argument is clearly articulated and logically structured. | The argument is generally clear and logical, with minor inconsistencies. | The argument is somewhat unclear or inconsistently structured. | The argument lacks clarity and logical structure. |
| Evidence | Evidence is thorough, relevant, and convincingly supports the argument. | Evidence is generally strong and relevant, with minor lapses. | Evidence is somewhat sparse, irrelevant, or does not fully support the argument. | Evidence is lacking or largely irrelevant. |
| Use of Generative AI | AI is used effectively to support arguments, demonstrating a high understanding of its capabilities and limitations. | AI is used effectively, but understanding or integration could be improved. | AI is used, but not effectively integrated or misunderstood. | AI is not used, or its use does not contribute to the argument. |
| Reflection on AI | The student clearly articulates how AI contributed to their critical thinking process and considers its limitations. | The student generally explains how AI contributed to their thinking, with minor lapses in considering its limitations. | The student’s explanation of how AI contributed to their thinking is unclear or superficial. | The student does not explain how AI contributed to their thinking. |
Analytic Rubric 2: Assessing Generative AI Use and Integration
| Criteria | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Understanding of AI | The student demonstrates a deep understanding of the capabilities and limitations of the AI. | The student demonstrates a good understanding of the AI, with minor misconceptions. | The student shows a basic understanding of the AI but has significant misconceptions. | The student shows little to no understanding of the AI. |
| Integration of AI | AI is seamlessly integrated into the work, effectively augmenting the student’s critical thinking. | AI is generally well integrated, though at times it may seem somewhat forced or awkward. | AI integration is inconsistent or superficial, not effectively augmenting the critical thinking process. | AI is not effectively integrated into the work. |
| Reflection on AI | The student clearly reflects on the role of AI in their work, considering both its contributions and its limitations. | The student generally reflects well on the AI’s role, though considerations of its limitations may be superficial. | The student’s reflection on the AI’s role is minimal or lacks depth. | The student does not reflect on the AI’s role in their work. |
| Innovation with AI | The student uses AI in novel or innovative ways to enhance their argument. | The student uses AI effectively, though it may lack innovation. | The student uses AI in a straightforward or predictable way, not enhancing the argument. | The student does not use AI in an innovative or meaningful way. |
Sample Rubrics Reproduced with permission: Developed with ChatGPT by McMaster University P.R. Macpherson Institute. Adapted under the following Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Considerations for Teaching
No matter what tools learners utilize to reach their educational goals, effective student learning stems from good teaching practice. Aligning your teaching practice with the principles of good pedagogy will prepare your learners to live and thrive in a changing world.
Universal Design for Learning (UDL) Framework for Course and Assignment Planning
The UDL framework emphasizes flexibility in instructional methods, materials, and assessments to accommodate learners with diverse abilities, background, and lived experiences that may shape how they learn best.
Refer to our Guide to Universal Design for Learning
Learning Outcomes Development
Consider whether the use of GAI tools aligns with your course and lesson learning outcomes.
Refer to our Guide for Developing Learning Outcomes.
Leverage AI to Foster Higher Order Thinking
Consider how you might use generative AI tools to encourage problem solving, creativity, reflection, originality, and critical thought.
Refer to our Guide for Using Bloom’s Taxonomy of the Cognitive Domain for writing learning outcomes that capture multiple levels of understanding.
Assessment and Assignment Design
- Consider using both formative and summative assessment
- Consider authentic and alternative assessment strategies
- Consider offering a choice from a variety of assignments
Formative and Summative Assessment Strategies
Refer to our Guide to Formative and Summative Assessment.
Alternative and Authentic Assessment
Sample assessment strategies
Refer to our Guide to Alternative and Authentic Assessment.
References
ChatGPT, 4. (2023, July 27 2023). 13 Feb. version, OpenAI, 9 Mar. 2023, chat.openai.com/chat. (T. J. Bahr, Interviewer)
Jennie Miron et al. (2023, May 29). Faculty of Health Sciences – Faculty Guide for the use of GAI in Learning Settings . Toronto. (Faculty of Health Sciences & Wellness (Humber Polytechnic) — Faculty Guide for the use of Artificial Intelligence in Learning Settings – May 29, 2023 Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial 4.0 International License.)
McMaster University. (2023, June). Provisional Guidelines: The Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Teaching and Learning at McMaster University. Hamilton. (Provisional Guidelines: The Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Teaching and Learning at McMaster University – June, 2023 by McMaster University Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial 4.0 International License.)
