arXiv subjects

Aditya Johri

Publications and source records attributed to Aditya Johri.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

A Guided Inquiry Approach to Students Co-Designing Generative AI Course Policies

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.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2026

A Survey Instrument to Assess Students' AI and Generative AI Knowledge

In this research-to-practice paper we present a survey that can be used to assess students' AI knowledge. As the use of artificial intelligence (AI), including generative artificial intelligence (GenAI), has proliferated, so has the need to educate students about the topic. A range of AI literacy frameworks have been proposed, outlining the essential knowledge that students should have. Alongside, different ways of assessing AI knowledge have been developed. As yet, there is a lack of assessment instruments capable of evaluating multiple forms of student knowledge, including technical concepts, practical applications, and ethical concerns about AI use. In this article, we present a study implementing a comprehensive instrument to assess AI knowledge. The instrument combines measures from multiple scales to capture a range of literacy features and actual knowledge. We implemented the instrument in a higher education setting to assess its viability and usefulness and found that the instrument exhibited useful diagnostic capabilities and was able to identify common misconceptions among students. Although students performed well overall, there was a significant misunderstanding of how AI, especially GenAI systems, work. It also identified a lack of higher-level knowledge. The instrument is publicly available for use by others. We foresee its usefulness as a diagnostic that goes beyond understanding students' attitudes and perceptions of AI and GenAI use and tests multiple aspects of students' knowledge and conceptual understanding. This can enable the development of targeted instruction.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2026

A Longitudinal Analysis of Public Discourse on AI Ethics in Education Using Twitter Data

The rapid integration of artificial intelligence (AI) and generative AI (GenAI) into education presents significant opportunities to enhance teaching and learning, while raising ethical concerns about the responsible use of these technologies in educational settings. Understanding how the public perceives and debates these issues is increasingly important for educators, institutions, and policymakers seeking to integrate AI responsibly and equitably. Social media platforms, where such debates unfold frequently and at scale, offer a valuable lens for capturing large-scale, real-time public reactions to key developments as they emerge. In this study, we analyse five years (2019-2024) of discourse on Twitter (now X) to trace the evolving public conversation around AI ethics in education, paying particular attention to the release of ChatGPT as a pivotal moment that reshaped the nature and tone of that discourse. Using BERT-based topic modelling and SetFit sentiment analysis to identify dominant themes and track sentiment over time, we find that the discourse has been predominantly positive across the observation period, with negative sentiment concentrated around specific ethical controversies. More recently, anxieties about academic integrity and the broader implications of generative AI have come to dominate the conversation. Rather than reflecting a polarized debate, public discourse appears pragmatic and largely receptive to AI integration, though accompanied by growing calls for ethical oversight and institutional accountability. By providing a longitudinal account of public sentiment surrounding AI ethics in education, this study informs educators, institutions, and policymakers an empirically grounded understanding of public expectations, informing the development of responsible, transparent, and equitable approaches to AI integration across educational contexts.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2026

A Comparative Analysis of Institutional and Course Generative AI Policies within Higher Education: Implications for Instruction in Computing Education

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.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2026

Uncovering Students' Mental Models of Generative Artificial Intelligence

In this paper we present a study of students' mental models of generative AI (GenAI). A student's mental model of GenAI influences not only how they perceive the technology's capabilities and limitations but also how they choose to integrate it into their academic work. Whether they view it as a collaborative partner, a shortcut to complete tasks, or something in between, depends on how they conceptualize its use. This study addresses the following questions: (I) What mental models do undergraduate students hold about GenAI? and (II) What aspects of conceptual knowledge - declarative, procedural, and conditional - are present in these mental models? Sixty-four concept maps were collected from students enrolled in a course on technology ethics. Students were asked to construct concept maps representing their understanding of GenAI use. The concept maps were analyzed using a structured codebook and the analysis revealed five categories of mental models: technical process based, educational tool based, transition model, consequence aware model, integrated model. Declarative knowledge was most dominant across maps, suggesting that students largely understood GenAI primarily at a surface level - knowing its names, tools, and applications but demonstrate limited procedural understanding of how it works and limited conditional knowledge about when and why it should or should not be used. By identifying students' mental models, we can improve students' AI literacy by designing curriculum and guidelines that improve cognition while ensuring responsible and ethical use.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2026

Teaching Usable Privacy in HCI Education: Designing, Implementing, and Evaluating an Active Learning Graduate Course

As digital systems increasingly rely on pervasive data collection and inference, educating future designers and researchers about Usable Privacy has become a critical need for HCI. However, privacy education in higher education is often fragmented, theory-heavy, or detached from real-world applications. Thus, in this paper, we present the design, implementation, and evaluation of a 15-week graduate-level course on Usable Privacy that addresses this through active, practice-oriented pedagogy. The course integrates use cases, structured role playing, case-based discussions, guest lectures, and a multi-phase research project to support students in reasoning about privacy from multiple stakeholder perspectives. Grounded in contemporary privacy research and the Modern Privacy framework, the curriculum emphasizes both conceptual understanding and applied research skills. We report findings from two course offerings in consecutive years (2024-2025) using a mixed-methods evaluation that combines quantitative teaching evaluations with qualitative analysis of student reflections and instructor observations. Results indicate increased student engagement, improved ability to articulate trade-offs in privacy design, and stronger connections between theory and practice. To support adoption and replication, we also release detailed assignment descriptions and grading rubrics. This work contributes an empirically informed model for teaching Usable Privacy in HCI education and offers actionable guidance for educators seeking to integrate privacy into their curricula.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2025

The Evolving Media Discourse on ChatGPT and Higher Education

This research full paper examines how news media have been instrumental in creating specific narratives about generative AI applications, especially ChatGPT, in higher education, and how these narratives have changed over time. The introduction of emerging technologies in higher education is driven not only by their technological affordances but also by the narratives built around their perceived value, risks, and possibilities. Therefore, understanding how news media narratives contribute to sociotechnical imaginaries - the imagined futures of technology use that institutions and educators inherit - is important for evaluating ChatGPT's role in teaching and learning, including engineering education. Through temporal and sentiment analyses of 198 U.S. news articles from November 2022 to October 2024, we traced the evolving narratives surrounding generative AI and the use of ChatGPT in higher education. We found that the media discourse largely centered on institutional responses, with policy changes and teaching practices showing the most consistent presence and positive sentiment over time. Conversely, coverage of topics such as human-centered learning, the job market, and skill development appeared more sporadic, with initially uncertain portrayals gradually shifting toward cautious optimism. Media sentiment toward ChatGPT's role in college admissions remained predominantly negative. Our findings suggest that media narratives prioritize institutional responses to generative AI over the long-term, broader ethical, social, and labor-related implications. This imbalance is especially relevant to engineering and computing education, where students must be prepared not only to use AI tools but also to critically evaluate the broader sociotechnical consequences of AI as future designers of AI-enabled technologies.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2025

Systematic Review Of Collaborative Learning Activities For Promoting AI Literacy

Improving artificial intelligence (AI) literacy has become an important consideration for academia and industry with the widespread adoption of AI technologies. Collaborative learning (CL) approaches have proven effective for information literacy, and in this study, we investigate the effectiveness of CL in improving AI knowledge and skills. We systematically collected data to create a corpus of nine studies from 2015-2023. We used the Interactive-Constructive-Active-Passive (ICAP) framework to theoretically analyze the CL outcomes for AI literacy reported in each. Findings suggest that CL effectively increases AI literacy across a range of activities, settings, and groups of learners. While most studies occurred in classroom settings, some aimed to broaden participation by involving educators and families or using AI agents to support teamwork. Additionally, we found that instructional activities included all the ICAP modes. We draw implications for future research and teaching.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2025

Mapping Students' AI Literacy Framing and Learning through Reflective Journals

This research paper presents a study of undergraduate technology students' self-reflective learning about artificial intelligence (AI). Research on AI literacy proposes that learners must develop five competencies associated with AI: awareness, knowledge, application, evaluation, and development. It is important to understand what, how, and why students learn about AI so formal instruction can better support their learning. We conducted a reflective journal study where students described their interactions with AI each week. Data was collected over six weeks and analyzed using an emergent interpretive process. We found that the participants were aware of AI, expressed opinions on their future use of AI skills, and conveyed conflicted feelings about developing deep AI expertise. They also described ethical concerns with AI use and saw themselves as intermediaries of knowledge for friends and family. We present the implications of this study and propose ideas for future work in this area.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2025

The Narrative Construction of Generative AI Efficacy by the Media: A Case Study of the Role of ChatGPT in Higher Education

The societal role of technology, including artificial intelligence (AI), is often shaped by sociocultural narratives. This study examines how U.S. news media construct narratives about the efficacy of generative AI (GenAI), using ChatGPT in higher education as a case study. Grounded in Agenda Setting Theory, we analyzed 198 articles published between November 2022 and October 2024, employing LDA topic modeling and sentiment analysis. Our findings identify six key topics in the media discourse, with sentiment analysis revealing generally positive portrayals of ChatGPT's integration into higher education through policy, curriculum, teaching practices, collaborative decision-making, skill development, and human-centered learning. In contrast, media narratives express more negative sentiment regarding their impact on entry-level jobs and college admissions. This research highlights how media coverage can influence public perceptions of GenAI in education and provides actionable insights for policymakers, educators, and AI developers navigating its adoption and representation in public discourse.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2025

Generative Artificial Intelligence for Academic Research: Evidence from Guidance Issued for Researchers by Higher Education Institutions in the United States

The recent development and use of generative AI (GenAI) has signaled a significant shift in research activities such as brainstorming, proposal writing, dissemination, and even reviewing. This has raised questions about how to balance the seemingly productive uses of GenAI with ethical concerns such as authorship and copyright issues, use of biased training data, lack of transparency, and impact on user privacy. To address these concerns, many Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) have released institutional guidance for researchers. To better understand the guidance that is being provided we report findings from a thematic analysis of guidelines from thirty HEIs in the United States that are classified as R1 or 'very high research activity.' We found that guidance provided to researchers: (1) asks them to refer to external sources of information such as funding agencies and publishers to keep updated and use institutional resources for training and education; (2) asks them to understand and learn about specific GenAI attributes that shape research such as predictive modeling, knowledge cutoff date, data provenance, and model limitations, and educate themselves about ethical concerns such as authorship, attribution, privacy, and intellectual property issues; and (3) includes instructions on how to acknowledge sources and disclose the use of GenAI, how to communicate effectively about their GenAI use, and alerts researchers to long term implications such as over reliance on GenAI, legal consequences, and risks to their institutions from GenAI use. Overall, guidance places the onus of compliance on individual researchers making them accountable for any lapses, thereby increasing their responsibility.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2025

The Responsible Development of Automated Student Feedback with Generative AI

Providing rich, constructive feedback to students is essential for supporting and enhancing their learning. Recent advancements in Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI), particularly with large language models (LLMs), present new opportunities to deliver scalable, repeatable, and instant feedback, effectively making abundant a resource that has historically been scarce and costly. From a technical perspective, this approach is now feasible due to breakthroughs in AI and Natural Language Processing (NLP). While the potential educational benefits are compelling, implementing these technologies also introduces a host of ethical considerations that must be thoughtfully addressed. One of the core advantages of AI systems is their ability to automate routine and mundane tasks, potentially freeing up human educators for more nuanced work. However, the ease of automation risks a ``tyranny of the majority'', where the diverse needs of minority or unique learners are overlooked, as they may be harder to systematize and less straightforward to accommodate. Ensuring inclusivity and equity in AI-generated feedback, therefore, becomes a critical aspect of responsible AI implementation in education. The process of developing machine learning models that produce valuable, personalized, and authentic feedback also requires significant input from human domain experts. Decisions around whose expertise is incorporated, how it is captured, and when it is applied have profound implications for the relevance and quality of the resulting feedback. Additionally, the maintenance and continuous refinement of these models are necessary to adapt feedback to evolving contextual, theoretical, and student-related factors. Without ongoing adaptation, feedback risks becoming obsolete or mismatched with the current needs of diverse student populations [...]

cs.CY↗

arXiv2025

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, 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.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2025

Lessons for GenAI Literacy From a Field Study of Human-GenAI Augmentation in the Workplace

Generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) is increasingly becoming a part of work practices across the technology industry and being used across a range of industries. This has necessitated the need to better understand how GenAI is being used by professionals in the field so that we can better prepare students for the workforce. An improved understanding of the use of GenAI in practice can help provide guidance on the design of GenAI literacy efforts including how to integrate it within courses and curriculum, what aspects of GenAI to teach, and even how to teach it. This paper presents a field study that compares the use of GenAI across three different functions - product development, software engineering, and digital content creation - to identify how GenAI is currently being used in the industry. This study takes a human augmentation approach with a focus on human cognition and addresses three research questions: how is GenAI augmenting work practices; what knowledge is important and how are workers learning; and what are the implications for training the future workforce. Findings show a wide variance in the use of GenAI and in the level of computing knowledge of users. In some industries GenAI is being used in a highly technical manner with deployment of fine-tuned models across domains. Whereas in others, only off-the-shelf applications are being used for generating content. This means that the need for what to know about GenAI varies, and so does the background knowledge needed to utilize it. For the purposes of teaching and learning, our findings indicated that different levels of GenAI understanding needs to be integrated into courses. From a faculty perspective, the work has implications for training faculty so that they are aware of the advances and how students are possibly, as early adopters, already using GenAI to augment their learning practices.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2024

Analysis of Generative AI Policies in Computing Course Syllabi

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.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2024

Misconceptions, Pragmatism, and Value Tensions: Evaluating Students' Understanding and Perception of Generative AI for Education

In this research paper we examine undergraduate students' use of and perceptions of generative AI (GenAI). Students are early adopters of the technology, utilizing it in atypical ways and forming a range of perceptions and aspirations about it. To understand where and how students are using these tools and how they view them, we present findings from an open-ended survey response study with undergraduate students pursuing information technology degrees. Students were asked to describe 1) their understanding of GenAI; 2) their use of GenAI; 3) their opinions on the benefits, downsides, and ethical issues pertaining to its use in education; and 4) how they envision GenAI could ideally help them with their education. Findings show that students' definitions of GenAI differed substantially and included many misconceptions - some highlight it as a technique, an application, or a tool, while others described it as a type of AI. There was a wide variation in the use of GenAI by students, with two common uses being writing and coding. They identified the ability of GenAI to summarize information and its potential to personalize learning as an advantage. Students identified two primary ethical concerns with using GenAI: plagiarism and dependency, which means that students do not learn independently. They also cautioned that responses from GenAI applications are often untrustworthy and need verification. Overall, they appreciated that they could do things quickly with GenAI but were cautious as using the technology was not necessarily in their best long-term as it interfered with the learning process. In terms of aspirations for GenAI, students expressed both practical advantages and idealistic and improbable visions. They said it could serve as a tutor or coach and allow them to understand the material better. We discuss the implications of the findings for student learning and instruction.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2024

Expanding AI Awareness Through Everyday Interactions with AI: A Reflective Journal Study

As the application of AI continues to expand, students in technology programs are poised to be both producers and users of the technologies. They are also positioned to engage with AI applications within and outside the classroom. While focusing on the curriculum when examining students' AI knowledge is common, extending this connection to students' everyday interactions with AI provides a more complete picture of their learning. In this paper, we explore student's awareness and engagement with AI in the context of school and their daily lives. Over six weeks, 22 undergraduate students participated in a reflective journal study and submitted a weekly journal entry about their interactions with AI. The participants were recruited from a technology and society course that focuses on the implications of technology on people, communities, and processes. In their weekly journal entries, participants reflected on interactions with AI on campus (coursework, advertises campus events, or seminars) and beyond (social media, news, or conversations with friends and family). The journal prompts were designed to help them think through what they had read, watched, or been told and reflect on the development of their own perspectives, knowledge, and literacy on the topic. Overall, students described nine categories of interactions: coursework, news and current events, using software and applications, university events, social media related to their work, personal discussions with friends and family, interacting with content, and gaming. Students reported that completing the diaries allowed them time for reflection and made them more aware of the presence of AI in their daily lives and of its potential benefits and drawbacks. This research contributes to the ongoing work on AI awareness and literacy by bringing in perspectives from beyond a formal educational context.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2024

A Roles-based Competency Framework for Integrating Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Engineering Courses

In this practice paper, we propose a framework for integrating AI into disciplinary engineering courses and curricula. The use of AI within engineering is an emerging but growing area and the knowledge, skills, and abilities (KSAs) associated with it are novel and dynamic. This makes it challenging for faculty who are looking to incorporate AI within their courses to create a mental map of how to tackle this challenge. In this paper, we advance a role-based conception of competencies to assist disciplinary faculty with identifying and implementing AI competencies within engineering curricula. We draw on prior work related to AI literacy and competencies and on emerging research on the use of AI in engineering. To illustrate the use of the framework, we provide two exemplary cases. We discuss the challenges in implementing the framework and emphasize the need for an embedded approach where AI concerns are integrated across multiple courses throughout the degree program, especially for teaching responsible and ethical AI development and use.

cs.CY↗