An official website of the United States government
Generative AI (GenAI) is advancing rapidly, and the literature in computing education is expanding almost as quickly. Initial responses to GenAI tools were mixed between panic and utopian optimism. Many were fast to point out the opportunities and challenges of GenAI. Researchers reported that these new tools are capable of solving most introductory programming tasks and are causing disruptions throughout the curriculum. These tools can write and explain code, enhance error messages, create resources for instructors, and even provide feedback and help for students like a traditional teaching assistant. In 2024, new research started to emerge on the effects of GenAI usage in the computing classroom. These new data involve the use of GenAI to support classroom instruction at scale and to teach students how to code with GenAI. In support of the former, a new class of tools is emerging that can provide personalized feedback to students on their programming assignments or teach both programming and prompting skills at the same time. With the literature expanding so rapidly, this report aims to summarize and explain what is happening on the ground in computing classrooms. We provide a systematic literature review; a survey of educators and industry professionals; and interviews with educators using GenAI in their courses, educators studying GenAI, and researchers who create GenAI tools to support computing education. The triangulation of these methods and data sources expands the understanding of GenAI usage and perceptions at this critical moment for our community.
more »
« less
This content will become publicly available on April 30, 2026
Engineering Educators’ Perspectives on the Impact of Generative AI in Higher Education
The introduction of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) has been met with a mix of reactions by higher education institutions, ranging from consternation and resistance to wholehearted acceptance. Previous work has looked at the discourse and policies adopted by universities across the U.S. as well as educators, along with the inclusion of GenAI-related content and topics in higher education. Building on previous research, this study reports findings from a survey of engineering educators on their use of and perspectives toward generative AI. Specifically, we surveyed 98 educators from engineering, computer science, and education who participated in a workshop on GenAI in Engineering Education to learn about their perspectives on using these tools for teaching and research. We asked them about their use of and comfort with GenAI, their overall perspectives on GenAI, the challenges and potential harms of using it for teaching, learning, and research, and examined whether their approach to using and integrating GenAI in their classroom influenced their experiences with GenAI and perceptions of it. Consistent with other research in GenAI education, we found that while the majority of participants were somewhat familiar with GenAI, reported use varied considerably. We found that educators harbored mostly hopeful and positive views about the potential of GenAI. We also found that those who engaged more with their students on the topic of GenAI, both as communicators (those who spoke directly with their students) and as incorporators (those who included it in their syllabus), tend to be more positive about its contribution to learning, while also being more attuned to its potential abuses. These findings suggest that integrating and engaging with generative AI is essential to foster productive interactions between instructors and students around this technology. Our work ultimately contributes to the evolving discourse on GenAI use, integration, and avoidance within educational settings. Through exploratory quantitative research, we have identified specific areas for further investigation.
more »
« less
- PAR ID:
- 10589946
- Publisher / Repository:
- IEEE EDUCON 2025
- Date Published:
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Abstract As generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) tools such as ChatGPT become more capable and accessible, their use in educational settings is likely to grow. However, the academic community lacks a comprehensive understanding of the perceptions and attitudes of students and instructors toward these new tools. In the Fall 2023 semester, we surveyed 982 students and 76 faculty at a large public university in the United States, focusing on topics such as perceived ease of use, ethical concerns, the impact of GenAI on learning, and differences in responses by role, gender, and discipline. We found that students and faculty did not differ significantly in their attitudes toward GenAI in higher education, except regarding ease of use, hedonic motivation, habit, and interest in exploring new technologies. Students and instructors also used GenAI for coursework or teaching at similar rates, although regular use of these tools was still low across both groups. Among students, we found significant differences in attitudes between males in STEM majors and females in non-STEM majors. These findings underscore the importance of considering demographic and disciplinary diversity when developing policies and practices for integrating GenAI in educational contexts, as GenAI may influence learning outcomes differently across various groups of students. This study contributes to the broader understanding of how GenAI can be leveraged in higher education while highlighting potential areas of inequality that need to be addressed as these tools become more widely used.more » « less
-
The emergence of generative artificial intelligence (GAI) has started to introduce a fundamental reexamination of established teaching methods. These GAI systems offer a chance for both educators and students to reevaluate their academic endeavors. Reevaluation of current practices is particularly pertinent in assessment within engineering instruction, where advanced generative text algorithms are proficient in addressing intricate challenges like those found in engineering courses. While this juncture presents a moment to revisit general assessment methods, the actual response of faculty to the incorporation of GAI in their evaluative techniques remains unclear. To investigate this, we have initiated a study delving into the mental constructs that engineering faculty hold about evaluation, focusing on their evolving attitudes and responses to GAI, as reported in the Fall of 2023. Adopting a long-term data-gathering strategy, we conducted a series of surveys, interviews, and recordings targeting the evaluative decision-making processes of a varied group of engineering educators across the United States. This paper presents the data collection process, our participants’ demographics, our data analysis plan, and initial findings based on the participants’ backgrounds, followed by our future work and potential implications. The analysis of the collected data will utilize qualitative thematic analysis in the next step of our study. Once we complete our study, we believe our findings will sketch the early stages of this emerging paradigm shift in the assessment of undergraduate engineering education, offering a novel perspective on the discourse surrounding evaluation strategies in the field. These insights are vital for stakeholders such as policymakers, educational leaders, and instructors, as they have significant ramifications for policy development, curriculum planning, and the broader dialogue on integrating GAI into educational evaluation.more » « less
-
This work-in-progress paper explores university students’ perspectives on Generative Artificial Intelligence (GAI) tools, such as ChatGPT, an increasingly prominent topic in the academic community. There is ongoing debate about whether faculty should teach students how to use GAI tools, restrict their usage to maintain academic integrity, or establish regulatory guidelines for sustained integration into higher education. Unfortunately, limited research exists beyond surface-level policies and educator opinions regarding GAI, and its full impact on student learning remains largely unknown. Therefore, understanding students' perceptions and how they use GAI is crucial to ensuring its effective and ethical integration into higher education. As GAI continues to disrupt traditional educational paradigms, this study seeks to explore how students perceive its influence on their learning and problem-solving. As part of a larger mixed-methods study, this work-in-progress paper presents preliminary findings from the qualitative portion using a phenomenological approach that answers the research question: How do university students perceive disruptive technologies like ChatGPT affecting their education and learning? By exploring the implications of Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools on student learning, academic integrity, individual beliefs, and community norms, this study contributes to the broader discourse on the role of emerging technologies in shaping the future of teaching and learning in education.more » « less
-
Since the release of ChatGPT in 2022, Generative AI (GenAI) is increasingly being used in higher education computing classrooms across the United States. While scholars have looked at overall institutional guidance for the use of GenAI and reports have documented the response from schools in the form of broad guidance to instructors, we do not know what policies and practices instructors are actually adopting and how they are being communicated to students through course syllabi. To study instructors' policy guidance, we collected 98 computing course syllabi from 54 R1 institutions in the U.S. and studied the GenAI policies they adopted and the surrounding discourse. Our analysis shows that 1) most instructions related to GenAI use were as part of the academic integrity policy for the course and 2) most syllabi prohibited or restricted GenAI use, often warning students about the broader implications of using GenAI, e.g. lack of veracity, privacy risks, and hindering learning. Beyond this, there was wide variation in how instructors approached GenAI including a focus on how to cite GenAI use, conceptualizing GenAI as an assistant, often in an anthropomorphic manner, and mentioning specific GenAI tools for use. We discuss the implications of our findings and conclude with current best practices for instructors.more » « less
