发表机构
George Mason University; Montgomery College（乔治梅森大学; 蒙哥马利学院）
机构由 AI 辅助整理，请以论文原文为准。AI 中文总结
本文针对高等教育中机构与课程的生成式人工智能政策做比较分析，通过对美国研究密集型高校的机构及课程大纲指导进行二次分析，发现机构虽倾向使用，但课程层面采用谨慎，还提出以教师为中心的框架来指导GenAI未来应用。
AI 中文摘要
随着ChatGPT等生成式人工智能（GenAI）应用的使用增加，高等教育机构（HEIs）发布了一系列指导方针和政策来引导其在机构内的采用。在计算机科学（CS）课程中，GenAI的采用率特别高，对学生学习的影响重大。目前，缺乏对机构提供的指导及其在教学中的应用的比较分析。本文通过比较机构和计算机课程层面的指导来填补这一空白。我们对美国研究密集型高等教育机构的机构和课程大纲指导进行了二次分析。研究结果表明，虽然机构指导更倾向于使用，但在课程层面，采用仍然谨慎。我们讨论了其影响，并提出了一个以教师为中心的框架来指导未来GenAI的采用。
英文摘要
With the increased use of generative AI (GenAI) applications such as ChatGPT, higher education institutions (HEIs) have released a range of guidelines and policies to direct adoption within their institutions. In computer science (CS) courses GenAI adoption is especially high and the implications for student learning are significant. At the same time, instructors have also been forced to address the use of GenAI as students have started to use it for a range of functions. Currently, comparative analysis of guidance provided by institutions and its uptake in instruction is lacking. In this paper we bridge this gap by comparing institutional and computing course level guidance to better understand this terrain. We utilize secondary analysis of institutional and course syllabi guidelines from higher education institutions in the U.S. classified as research-intensive. Our findings reveal that although institutional guidance is more pro-use, at the course-level the uptake is still guarded. We discuss the implications and propose an instructor-centered framework to guide future adoption of GenAI.
CommentsUnder review for SIGCSE conference
