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

Synthesis: Hingle and Johri (2026) report an exploratory study in which students co-designed a Generative AI course policy through a guided inquiry activity. Students first drafted individual proposals for appropriate and ethical GenAI use, then refined them collaboratively by incorporating diverse stakeholder perspectives. Analysis of student artifacts and group discussions showed participants prioritized training for students and instructors, standardized disclosure procedures, stronger institutional support, and greater involvement in GenAI-related decision-making. The study offers pedagogical insights into how policy co-design can surface student values and sensemaking about governing AI use in educational contexts.

Co-Designing GenAI Policy Through Guided Inquiry

Institutions and instructors increasingly confront questions about how to support learning while addressing the ethical and institutional concerns raised by Generative AI. Yet students — the people who make most day-to-day decisions about AI use — are largely absent from the policy-making process. This exploratory study examines a guided inquiry activity in which students took an active role in designing a GenAI course policy.

The activity progressed through several stages: students first completed readings on AI use, then used GenAI to brainstorm initial policy ideas; next, they articulated their own perspectives in a written assignment and an individually designed course policy; finally, they collaborated with peers to incorporate diverse stakeholder perspectives into a collective policy. Two research questions guided the study: what practical factors students prioritize in their GenAI use policies and how they justify these choices, and how participants reflect on the policy design process.

What Students Prioritize

1. Training for students and instructors. Participants emphasized the need for clear guidance and skill development around appropriate GenAI use — a demand that maps to AI Literacy and Teacher Education.
2. Standardized disclosure procedures. Students wanted consistent, transparent expectations for when and how to disclose AI use in academic work.
3. Stronger institutional support. Rather than relying on individual instructors, students called for coherent, institution-level backing for GenAI policy.
4. Greater involvement in decision-making. Participants wanted a meaningful role in shaping the rules that govern their learning, reflecting a desire for Agency in AI governance.

Students described the policy design process itself as valuable, noting that it forced them to engage with multiple perspectives and the inherent trade-offs involved in governing AI use. This positions policy co-design as both an outcome and a learning activity: it surfaces student values and concerns while developing their capacity to reason about responsible AI use.

Implications

The findings support treating students as partners in AI governance rather than passive subjects of policy. A guided inquiry approach can serve as a practical pedagogy for eliciting student perspectives on Generative AI use, and it complements broader institutional efforts to develop AI Literacy and responsible-use norms across Higher Ed. For instructors, the activity offers a low-cost way to translate student voice into course-level policy while building students' capacity for ethical reasoning about AI.

Connected Concepts

• Generative AI
• AI Education
• Governance
• Educational Policy AI
• Agency
• AI Literacy
• AI Use Disclosure
• Academic Integrity
• Teacher Role
• Student Engagement
• Higher Ed
• Ethics
• Curriculum Design

Connected Articles

• AI Adaptation Gap Higher Education 2026 — The AI Adaptation Gap in Higher Education
• Chang Should I Tell My Teacher AI Disclosure 2026 — "Should I Tell My Teacher?" Student AI Disclosure Practices
• Kirsanov Beyond Detection AI Online Assessments 2026 — Beyond Detection: How Students Use—and Hide—AI
• Reclaiming Epistemic Agency Co Agency 2026 — Reclaiming Epistemic Agency
• Students Perceptions AI Tools Study 2026 — Students' Perceptions of AI Tools for Study Productivity

Citation

Hingle, A., & Johri, A. (2026). A Guided Inquiry Approach to Students Co-Designing Generative AI Course Policies. arXiv:2608.28501.