A Guided Inquiry Approach to Students Co-Designing Generative AI Course Policies
2026-08-28 • Computers and Society
Computers and Society
AI summaryⓘ
The authors studied an activity where students created rules for using generative AI (GenAI) in their courses. Students first made their own ideas, then worked together to include different viewpoints and make a group policy. They focused on training, being clear about AI use, and wanting the school to support these efforts more. The students saw the process as a way to understand different opinions and the challenges of managing AI ethically. The authors highlight that having students help make policies can reveal their values and concerns about AI use in education.
generative AIpolicy co-designethical AI usestudent engagementstakeholder perspectivescollaborative learningeducational policyAI disclosureinstitutional support
Authors
Ashish Hingle, Aditya Johri
Abstract
As generative AI (GenAI) use among students increases, educators face growing questions about how to support learning while addressing ethical and institutional concerns. This exploratory study examines a guided inquiry activity in which students co-designed a GenAI course policy. Students first developed individual policy proposals focused on appropriate and ethical use of GenAI, then collaboratively refined them by incorporating diverse stakeholder perspectives. The following research questions guided the study: 1) what practical factors do students prioritize in their GenAI use policies, and how do they justify these choices? and 2) how do participants reflect on the policy design process? Participants first completed readings, then used GenAI to brainstorm initial policy ideas. Next, they articulated their own perspectives through a written assignment and a course policy they designed individually. Finally, they incorporated diverse stakeholder perspectives by collaborating with peers to develop a collective policy. Analysis of student artifacts and group discussions showed that participants prioritized training for students and instructors, standardized procedures for disclosing AI use, and stronger institutional support. Participants also wanted greater involvement in GenAI-related decision-making. They described the policy design process as a way to engage with multiple perspectives and the inherent trade-offs involved in governing AI use. This study offers pedagogical insights into how policy co-design activities can surface student values, concerns, and sensemaking about GenAI in educational contexts.