Amrita Ganguly, Aditya Johri, Nora McDonald, Areej Ali, et al. (2026) - George Mason University; Montgomery College. arXiv preprint.
Key Findings
- Compares institutional-level GenAI policy documents against course-level instructor policies, exposing a gap between top-down guidance and classroom uptake in higher-ed.
- Centers computing education (CS courses), where GenAI adoption is especially high and the implications for student learning are pronounced - links to ai-ed-implementation.
- Shows instructors are often forced to improvise local policies, raising coordination questions for ai-governance-education.
- Connects to broader policy-maker and equity debates about who sets AI-use rules and how consistently they apply across courses.
- Informs teacher-ai-adoption-confidence by showing uneven instructor readiness to translate policy into everyday practice.
Related Pages
- ai-governance-education - institutional vs course-level GenAI policy coordination
- ai-ed-implementation - translating GenAI policy into classroom practice
- policy-maker - who sets AI-use rules in higher education
- higher-ed - computing-education context
- ai-literacy - student/educator AI literacy underlies policy
- teacher-ai-adoption-confidence - instructor readiness to enact policy
- cross-cultural-student-perceptions-genai-computing — Did Alice Do Wrong? Cross-Cultural Differences in Student Perceptions of Generat
- llm-programming-support-governance-cs-education — Exploring the Design Space of LLM-Based Programming Support