Co-Constructing a GenAI Course Policy

Professor Corral’s research and teaching intersect to understand and improve how postsecondary institutions serve historically underrepresented students, particularly racially minoritized, economically disadvantaged, and immigrant populations. His research examines the pathways, transitions, and trajectories of these students alongside the role of institutional policies, finances, and programs that shape their access and success. These interests are reflected in the courses he has developed and taught, including Postsecondary Finance and Accountability, Race and Ethnicity in Higher Education, The Student Experience in Postsecondary Education, and Evaluation in Higher Education. Dr. Corral approaches GenAI through a critical, ethical, equity-informed perspective.

Daniel (Danny) Corral Assistant Professor, Department of Leadership, Higher and Adult Education, Ontario Institute for Studies in Education (OISE)

The Approach

Professor Corral developed their GenAI course policy through a deliberate co-construction process with students in the online, synchronous course, LHAE 5815: Postsecondary Finance and Accountability. Grounded in metacognitive principles and students-as-partners pedagogy, this approach invited graduate students to actively examine their own learning processes and contribute to establishing community norms around GenAI use.

Step 1: Establishing Institutional Context

Professor Corral began by sharing relevant institutional guidance with students:

OISE guidance on ChatGPT use (under “Can I Use ChatGPT for my Assignment at OISE/UT?”)
University of Toronto Graduate School guidance

This grounded the conversation in U of T’s graduate-level expectations: maintaining the highest standards of academic quality and research integrity while ensuring any GenAI use happens with full transparency.

Step 2: Sharing the Instructor's GenAI Philosophy

Professor Corral articulated their own stance on GenAI in education:

Like all technologies, GenAI can reproduce, exacerbate, or interrupt inequalities
We are at a pivotal moment where these technologies continue to evolve, requiring ethical and responsible action
GenAI can be used as a study aid to enhance understanding and efficiency
Transparency and upholding the highest standards of quality teaching and learning are essential

Step 3: Presenting a Proposed Policy

Professor Corral shared a draft policy framework that included:

Prohibited uses: No AI for generating content, ideas, outlines, or written text for discussion questions, Op-Eds, or final papers
Permitted uses:
- Working through readings or sources for the final project. Example prompt: Can you give me examples of different kinds of tuition controls commonly used in HE finance?
- Editorial support to clarify the communication of ideas. Example prompt: I would like feedback on whether my I am providing ample support and evidence regarding my topic sentence on the two main reasons why CBD programs has proliferated
Accountability: Reflection requirement for any GenAI use; students responsible for all submitted content

Step 4: Student Discussion and Feedback

Students broke into small groups to discuss four guiding questions:

What do you think is fair and ethical GenAI use in this course?
What kinds of GenAI tools would help you learn in this course?
What might get in the way of your learning in this course?
What kinds of supports, beyond those provided by U of T, do you need to use GenAI responsibly in this course?

Step 5: Refining the Final Policy

Based on student feedback, Professor Corral revised the policy to include:

Clearer articulation of when and why GenAI might (or might not) be beneficial for learning
More specific permitted and prohibited uses with concrete examples
Assignment-specific guidelines presented in a table format that provides an at-a-glance reference, reducing ambiguity and supporting diverse learning needs
An instructor commitment to supporting students without judgment, and to monitor their own assumptions and biases (Schilke & Reimann, 2025).

The Final Co-Constructed Policy

The resulting policy includes the following key elements:

Opening Framework

Acknowledgment that GenAI can reproduce, exacerbate, or interrupt inequities
Clear statement that GenAI is not necessary to excel in the course
Invitation for students to reflect on their relationship with GenAI and whether it will advance their learning

When GenAI May Be Helpful

Clarifying complex concepts from readings (supporting all learning outcomes)
Understanding finance-specific terminology
Improving sentence-level clarity while preserving original ideas and analysis

When GenAI May Not Be Helpful

Lacks specialized course knowledge and proper sequencing
Limits opportunities for critical thinking (central to all learning outcomes)

Permitted Uses

Working through class readings or sources (e.g., asking clarifying questions about concepts, methods, significance) – but students are still expected to read the original source
Example prompt: “Can you give me examples of different kinds of tuition controls commonly used in higher education finance?”
Editorial support to clarify communication of ideas – but not to rewrite whole paragraphs or sections
Example prompt: “Does this sentence relate to my topic sentence argument…”

Prohibited Uses

Generating content for discussion questions, Op-Eds, or final papers
Generating original ideas or written text
Completing analytical work that demonstrates course mastery
Generating project ideas (though students can workshop/polish their own ideas)
Example of permitted use: “This is my stance on a tuition freeze, please ask me questions that challenge the assumptions I am making. Please do not give me content ideas.”

Assignment-Specific Visual Guideline

The table format provides an at-a-glance reference that removes ambiguity: students can quickly check what is permitted for each assignment. This visual organization makes the policy more accessible and reduces cognitive load, particularly helpful for students who may be uncertain about navigating GenAI use in academic contexts.

Assignment	GenAI as Learning Aid	GenAI as Editorial Aid	Reflection Required?
Weekly Discussion Questions	Permitted	Permitted	No
Op-Ed	Permitted	Permitted	Yes
Final Assignment (all parts)	Permitted	Permitted	Yes

Reflection Requirements

For assignments requiring reflection, students who use GenAI must address:

What GenAI tool did you use?
How did you use it?
How did the tool enhance your learning and engagement with the course concepts?

Instructor Commitment

The policy concludes with a statement recognizing that students might feel uncertain about disclosing GenAI use, with the instructor committing to supporting them through the process without judgement and to monitoring their own assumptions and biases. Questions about GenAI use are explicitly welcomed.

Pedagogical Rationale

Centering Student Agency and Transparency

Involving students in policy development treats them as partners in establishing community norms. This co-construction process trusts students to make ethical decisions, while still providing institutional guidance.

Metacognitive Reflection as Learning

The reflection requirement, grounded in research on metacognition (Sandoval-Lee, 2025), turns GenAI use into a learning opportunity. Instead of surveiling whether students use AI, the policy asks them to think critically about when, why, and how they engage with these tools.

Distinguishing Learning Aids from Learning Shortcuts

The policy draws clear lines between GenAI uses that support learning (clarifying concepts, improving clarity) and those that bypass it (generating ideas, producing content). It is valuable for students to understand that not all GenAI uses are equivalent; some build skills while others prevent skill development.

^ back to top