# AI Governance in Higher Education: Case Studies of Guidance at Big Ten Universities
## 4 Results
### Role-Specific Governance of AI
#### 4.2.1 Faculty  
Delivering high-quality education is one of the most important objectives of universities, and faculty play an indispensable role in this process. Therefore, it is unsurprising that most guidelines are written from a faculty's perspective:  
_At the TLTC, we look forward to helping you think creatively about your assessments and your specific learning outcomes to put authentic, relevant, student-centered learning at the forefront of your academic planning_--U Maryland  
As this statement suggests, although some AI guidelines are written for faculty, their content is still student-centered, aiming to improve learning outcomes. Specifically, university guidelines often imply three tasks for the role of a faculty. First, the guidelines present plenty of resources for faculty to learn what AI is, what its benefits and limitations are, how it may impact assessment and student learning, how it may impact education equity, etc. Therefore, the first task is for the faculty to become knowledgeable about AI. Although there is no enforcement or specific requirements for what faculty's level of knowledge should be on these topics, the following statement shows universities' preferences for faculty to be more familiarized with AI:  
_AI is quickly becoming an embedded element of the teaching and learning process that requires the acknowledgment and attention of instructors, instructional designers, and academic leaders._--Ohio State  
Second, faculty are encouraged to integrate AI into their pedagogical practices such as lecture preparation, assignment design, and brainstorming for active learning activities. On the one hand, the need to integrate AI is motivated by the increased productivity brought by AI, e.g., \"shortening the time instructors spend on creating course materials, coming up with examples and assignments, as well as making grading more efficient. (Northwestern U)\" On the other hand, inappropriate use of AI among students can hamper the learning process, making 'AI-proof' teaching practices necessary:  
_Probably the best way to guard against inappropriate use of AI-generated text is to redesign your assignments, both the prompts themselves and the related processes._--Indiana U  
This concern also leads to the third task for faculty: providing guidance for students and supervising students' AI usage. The guidelines support faculty in creating syllabus statements, communicating expectations of AI usage with students, and discussing the implications with students. While instructors have the freedom to define acceptable AI usage in their classes, the guidelines have made recommendations regarding the detection of AI-generated content. Generally, universities discourage the use of AI detection tools, highlighting their high false-positive rates and emphasizing the need to focus on the learning process rather than the assignment product:  
_The available tools are simply not effective in providing the evidence needed to build an academic integrity case against a student. Our pedagogies should be built with critical AI literacy in mind, so it's important to think through what goals AI prohibition is going to meet and whether enforcement is how you want to spend your time and energy._--U Illinois