Analysis of AI policies across HEI from 34 states in the United States finds a clear divergence: university-level policies emphasize data security and risk mitigation whereas school-level policies, when present, focus on pedagogical applications and tool usage.
Abstract
Artificial intelligence (AI) is rapidly transforming high-skilled domains, requiring higher education institutions (HEI) to balance the teaching of foundational principles with the integration of emerging tools to ensure workforce readiness. While HEI are increasingly adopting AI, many continue to grapple with how it should be incorporated into curricula and governed through policy, especially when such policies are set at different levels of an institution. This research analyzes AI policies across HEI from 34 states in the United States to investigate what these policies entail and how policies set across institutions as well as within different levels at an institution differ. Using natural language processing (NLP) to analyze institutional AI policies, we find a clear divergence: university-level policies emphasize data security and risk mitigation whereas school-level policies, when present, focus on pedagogical applications and tool usage. When focusing on business school specific policies, relatively few business schools maintain AI policies distinct from university frameworks, creating misalignment with discipline-specific learning objectives. This gap poses challenges particularly for faculty and students as well as for accreditation purposes. Our insights suggest that guidelines should be aligned with broader institutional policies while addressing discipline-specific learning objectives and evolving workforce demands.
Universities occupy a contradictory position in the age of generative artificial intelligence: they are simultaneously the institutions charged with preparing graduates for an AI-transformed workforce and organisations whose communication about AI is oriented primarily toward managing reputational and regulatory risk....
Berrin Yanıkkaya· 6th Current Issues in Busine...· 0 citations
This research blog argues that producing an AI policy is only the first step and proposes a comparative research agenda for examining policy coherence and institutional implementation capacity as the conditions through which responsible Generative AI governance can become embedded in everyday university practice.
Farzana Rahman, Tilottama Ahmed· HHH Research Blog· 0 citations
Course-level AI governance is shaped by the interaction of assessment design, authorship expectations, course purpose, AI adjacency, and instructor discretion, and variation is best understood as an outcome of delegated digital governance whose educational value depends on clarity, justification, and alignment with the...
The findings suggest that academic integrity in the GenAI era is shifting from a primarily punitive model toward a pedagogy-first ecosystem that combines clear expectations, assessment redesign, equitable access to vetted tools, and iterative governance.
Yu-Feng Qian· International Journal for Ed...· 0 citations
Examination of policies, directives, and standard operating procedures from 20 universities in the global south reveals that many sampled universities lack centralised governance mechanisms, with most relying on informal, department-level efforts.
Aijaz A. Shaikh, R. Doszhan, A. Nurgaliyeva et al.· Journal of Information &...· 0 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.