This presentation uses data from faculty surveys given in 2023 and 2024 to compare changes in faculty perspectives regarding how to effectively adapt to emerging AI tools available to students and faculty. It provides practical tips about how our faculty in various academic programs are handling AI in the classroom.

Acceptance is Not the End: Revisiting Faculty Perceptions of AI One Year Later Anyone in a teacher’s support group on social media knows that the questions and complaints about AI in the classroom are endless. It’s hard to believe that AI was unleashed upon the world in November 2022. A year and a half later, it seems we are still reeling at the impact. How do we detect the use of AI in written assignments? How do we teach students to use AI responsibly? Or do we ban it altogether? Wherever you stand in the conversation, we all must acknowledge that AI is ubiquitous in our educational landscape. Schools and institutions are incorporating AI-driven tools to enhance teaching and learning experiences. Examples include personalized learning platforms, intelligent tutoring systems, and adaptive assessments (Lin, Huang, and Lu). In addition to all the tools embedded specifically in educational products, a wide array of AI tools are publicly and freely available to both students and faculty outside the classroom. These AI capabilities are accessible to the public, highlighting the importance of informed decision-making and policy formulation. One of the ways faculty are trying to deal with AI is to make policy decisions about it. Informed policies can guide responsible adoption and implementation of AI in educational settings. Faculty members are also grappling with ethical considerations surrounding AI adoption in higher education. Patel and Garcia underscore the significance of incorporating discussions on ethical AI use into curricula. By fostering awareness of data privacy, algorithmic bias, and responsible AI practices, faculty can empower students to navigate AI technologies ethically and critically engage with digital resources (Patel and Garcia 123). After all, employers tell us that they want new graduates to have skills and experience working with AI: “A vast majority of U.S. professionals (83 percent) think students should be prepared to use AI upon entering the workforce, and they expect higher education to play a critical role in that preparation, according to a nationwide survey of 1,200 professionals,” (Gurchiek). And yet, many of us feel demoralized by students expecting us to assign grades to low quality writing assignments hastily generated by AI. As we noted in our presentation last year, faculty are struggling to answer questions about our own relevance now that students can just plug in a prompt and have an essay generated by AI. Policymakers, educators, and stakeholders need to understand AI’s potential impact on education. Overall, while there may be concerns and uncertainties surrounding the widespread adoption of AI in higher education, it's essential to recognize that faculty members' attitudes toward AI are diverse and multifaceted. Institutions can support faculty members by providing access to resources, fostering open dialogue about AI's implications, and promoting collaborative efforts to leverage AI for the benefit of students and the academic community. In 2023, we presented data from a survey of faculty in a presentation titled, “Beyond the Five Stages of Grief: Practical Responses to AI from a Multi-Disciplinary Perspective” that looked at faculty perceptions and use of AI as of Fall 2023. This presentation will compare the results of the 2023 survey to the same survey in Fall 2024, comparing faculty perceptions and use of AI over time. In our 2023 presentation, we discussed faculty responses to AI as they related to the five stages of grief: Denial: No way. Anger: I’m not giving in. Bargaining: It’s here so how do I deal with it? Depression: Is my job useless? Acceptance: It’s here to stay. In 2024, we wonder if some faculty are beginning to move beyond those five stages of grief to a sixth stage: Hope. In the stages of grief metaphor, hope means that one is ready to learn from this important life experience and has a willingness to face fears. We wondered if faculty perspectives and use of AI had changed over the last year and if we could sense signs of hope in relation to AI use. For example, in the 2023 survey, the most popular answer from KSU faculty participating in the survey (48.72%) was “somewhat agree” to the question “To what extent do you believe that artificial intelligence tools (e.g. ChatGPT, Bing Chat, Stable Diffusion, Dall-E, Adobe Firefly, etc.) can enhance student learning?” But our survey results hit a conundrum. While 71% of faculty were cautious, optimistic or even excited about AI, only 31.33% of respondents used AI in their teaching. This year we want to know if one of the numbers has shifted. We assume more faculty are now using AI. Will they be equally optimistic? We wonder what they will say in 2024. Interactivity: Interactive Activity 1 (opener): Use a Mentimeter multiple choice slide to assess where the audience is in their own stages of grief/acceptance/coexistence Interactive Activity 2 (mid-point): Use a Mentimeter free write slide to collect input from the audience regarding their own stage of grief/acceptance/coexistence/hope Interactive Activity 3 (after presentation of survey data): Breakout groups with the following discussion questions: What does hope look like with regard to AI? What practical application(s) do you employ with AI? How is the AI cliff impacting your discipline? Your profession? How are faculty communicating ethical issues/concerns, critical thinking about using AI to students? Should there be policies surrounding AI at your institution? If so, how should they be developed? Groups report back to the larger group and discuss Takeaways: As a result of attending this session, participants should gain Current landscape of AI at an R2 institution Practical applications Ideas of how to co-exist with AI Perspectives on changing attitudes toward AI Works Cited Gurchiek, Kathy. “Employers Want New Grads with AI Experience, Knowledge.” LinkedIn. February 20, 2024. Accessed May 12, 2024. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/employers-want-new-grads-ai-experience-knowledge-kathy-gurchiek-elzbf/ Lin, CC., Huang, A.Y.Q. & Lu, O.H.T. “Artificial Intelligence in Intelligent Tutoring Systems Toward Sustainable Education: A Systematic Review." Smart Learning Environments, vol. 10, no. 41, 2023. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-023-00260-y Patel, Anika, and Luis Garcia. "Ethical Considerations in AI Adoption: Educating Faculty and Students." Journal of Higher Education Ethics, vol. 17, no. 2, 2024, pp. 123-137. U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Technology, Artificial Intelligence and Future of Teaching and Learning: Insights and Recommendations, Washington, DC, 2023.