对比高校与计算机课程的AI政策，发现执行存在落差。
A Comparative Analysis of Institutional and Course Generative AI Policies within Higher Education: Implications for Instruction in Computing Education
- 分析美国研究型高校的机构与课程两级AI政策
- 机构鼓励使用，但课程实际采纳仍谨慎保守
- 提出以教师为中心的AI教学指导框架
随着生成式AI（GenAI）应用如ChatGPT的普及，高等教育机构（HEIs）纷纷发布指南以规范其在校园内的使用。在计算机科学（CS）课程中，GenAI的应用尤为广泛，对学生学习的影响显著。同时，教师也面临学生利用GenAI完成各类任务的挑战。目前，缺乏对机构层面与课程层面指导政策的比较分析。本文通过二次分析美国研究型高校的机构政策及课程教学大纲，揭示尽管机构政策倾向支持使用，但课程层面的实际采纳仍持谨慎态度。研究讨论了其教育意义，并提出一个以教师为中心的生成式AI教学采纳框架，以指导未来实践。
原文摘要 · Abstract (English)
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.
Thank you to arXiv for use of its open access interoperability. PaperDance 不是 arXiv 官方产品；中文卡片由大模型生成，请以原文为准。