Welcome to October 2025’s Spotlight on AI in Education bulletin. With how fast things are moving, this will help you cut through the noise and catch what’s important. The bulletin highlights on-the-ground practice, institutional perspectives and trends in generative AI use across the sector and beyond. We hope you find this useful.
If you have anything you’d like to contribute or see in this bulletin please email EE@sussex.ac.uk
This illustration was generated by Microsoft Co-Pilot using the prompt “robot student autumn” then edited by the author. 21st Oct 2025.
Upcoming Events at Sussex
EVENT: The Sussex AI in Education Community of Practice In-Person Meeting 4 (Focus – the Sussex Principles for AI in Education Principle 4: Academic Integrity and Student Experience.)
Tell me more: The 4th meeting of the AI in Education Community of Practice will be on Monday 1st December 2025. We will meet in the Library Teaching Room which is based on the ground floor near the accessible entrance (IDS side entrance). We will briefly share the university’s Principles for AI in Education (published here) and will focus our attention on Principle 4: Academic Integrity and Student Experience.
Note: this is a different room to previous CoP meetings but still in the Library.
Tell me more: The principles are the result of an institution-wide survey which was conducted in March 2025. Responses were synthesised and distilled into seven proposed principles which were shared at the AI Summit in April 2025. Feedback on the seven proposed principles was incorporated into revisions and the final draft was approved in the summer. Thank you for all the input we received for this important project.
Across the Sector
New Publication: AI and the Future of Universities (HEPI Report 193) 10/25.
Tell me more: HEPI, in partnership with the University of Southampton, published a new collection of essays AI and the Future of Universities (HEPI Report 193) on 16th October 2025. The collection is edited by Dr Giles Carden and Josh Freeman and is presented in the foreword as a “call to action”. Read more and download the pdf here: https://www.hepi.ac.uk/reports/right-here-right-now-new-report-on-how-ai-is-transforming-higher-education .
Join the Teaching and Learning with GenAI Community. If you’d like to join the community and be first to hear about events. Get in touch with us and we can add you to the list and dedicated MS Teams community. www.tinyurl.com/sussex-ai-cop
Disclaimer on any tools not supported at Sussex. Please do not share Sussex, student, colleague, sensitive or personal data via these platforms. Not being supported means they have not passed stringent Data Protection assessments and could put you at breach of policy and legislation. For a list of supported platforms for teaching and learning please visit the Educational Enhancement website.
This was a Spotlight on AI in Education update from Educational Enhancement.
As we begin a new academic year we’d like to share the following information, news and events with you. We would also like to welcome Kamila Bateman, who is the Academic Developer for USBS while Kitty Horne is on maternity leave
Congratulations to Emily Danvers!
Dr Emily Danvers, Senior Lecturer in Education at the University of Sussex has been awarded a prestigious National Teaching Fellowship from Advance HE.
If you’re interested in applying for the NTF we would strongly recommend attending Professor Wendy Garnham’s workshop on 5 November, and if you require any further information regarding either award please contact Simona Connelly
Sussex Education Festival 2026
After a wonderful Sussex Education Festival in 2025, we now have a date for our 2026 Festival. It will take place on Friday May 8th, 2026. Please make a note in your diary and keep this date free.
As we plan our event for the new academic year, this is a call for volunteers to form part of the steering group for the festival.
The time commitment is minimal (3-4 meetings between October and May) to explore possible themes and formats, draft a Call for Participation, receive expressions of interest and curate the programme for the day. Volunteers will also be asked to help disseminate the Call for Participation and registration information in their faculties.
Who might volunteer…
We are looking for volunteers (2 per Faculty) who may be:
Early career education and scholarship (E&S) colleagues, who are looking for opportunities to advance best practice at the institution
Research or professional services colleagues with an interest in educational enhancement, pedagogy, learning & teaching practice
Previous volunteers
School/Faculty/Subject Leads in education, student experience, assessment or other roles
PS colleagues
Why volunteer…
You can:
play a role in shaping this year’s festival and deciding on the key themes
explore an opportunity to network across the institution, meeting and working with colleagues in key roles
help build campus community
generate concrete examples of leadership and impact that might be helpful for HEA/SFHEA applications
To volunteer…
Please complete this short form stating who you are and why you would like to volunteer. Please respond by midday on Friday, October 10th
Learning Matters
Over the summer Learning Matters have published several blog posts and podcasts, including the following;
Oracy in the Curriculum Wednesday, November 26 · 1 – 4pm
This in-person event (Bramber House 255) consists of a series of lightning talks interspersed with time to chat and network with colleagues to share ideas and resources and ultimately to agree some useful action points around developing oracy in the curriculum at the University of Sussex. Register via Eventbrite.
Enhance Your Impact: A New Training Programme in Evaluation for Higher Education
We encourage colleagues to explore the Evaluation Essentials training programme– a new Sussex initiative designed specifically for higher education practitioners. This programme equips you with the principles and skills to conduct robust evaluations, helping you demonstrate impact and drive meaningful improvements. It’s an excellent resource for those undertaking projects to enhance the student experience.
Scholarship at Sussex webpage
We are pleased to announce that we now have a Scholarship at Sussex webpage, which provides a broad definition of what constitutes scholarship for our Education and Scholarship (E&S) colleagues and aligns with the promotion criteria. It also includes some nice examples of scholarship from colleagues across the institution. The webpage may be useful for people on the E&S track and other staff with an interest in education and scholarship, so please do share when appropriate.
Education and Innovation Fund
The funding for the Education and Innovation Fund has now finished, and there are no plans for any further funding, but we recently published a blog post about the outcomes of the EIF projects
The Education and Innovation Fund has helped staff and students at Sussex try out fresh ideas in teaching and learning. From AI tools and climate education to student teamwork and sustainability, the projects have made a real difference—leading to new resources, publications, and presentations.
Launched on 21 October 2022 the Education and Innovation Award fund has now awarded £127,918 in funding for 31 transformative projects.
This university initiative was designed as a three year fund for projects that explore new ideas in teaching and learning at Sussex. Funded projects were evaluated with the possibility of shaping future investment at Sussex
Some of the outcomes from the projects include
Luis Ponce Cuspinera and Iacopo Vivarelli Evaluation of an AI-assisted marking and feedback tool
Module conveners were asked to re-mark at least one question using Graide to assess feedback quality and quantity, staff satisfaction, grading speed, and the overall impact of AI. They expressed a strong interest in continuing to use Graide, highlighting its value and impact. Additionally, analysis showed that in many cases, over 50% of grading tasks were completed with “AI full assistance,” demonstrating the tool’s capability to autonomously deliver effective feedback.
Together with Abigail Wells, Emily published an open access article about her project, where they explain the concept of homeification as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Paul GilbertStudent Researchers in the BLDS Legacy Collection: Tricontinental, Mujeres, and the Worlds they Invite us to Imagine
Paul published the results of his winning project as Teaching with Tricontinental: A sourcebook for students working with radical periodicals, which is the outcome of a set of collaborative staff-student workshops at the University of Sussex that sought to engage students in working with radical periodicals as primary sources.
Anke SchwittayMaking Critical Hope Practical: Connecting Students, Solutions and the Curriculum
Anke’s winning project has generated one blog post for the School of Global Studies and one video titled Critical Hope in International Development Studies at Sussex University. She also presented at the 2024 Sussex Education Festival
Verona Ni Drisceoil Walk with me: Understanding, and Navigating, Community, Belonging and Inclusion in Higher Education
Verona has recently published on community and belonging as part of the wider work she has been doing as part of her winning project. She also presented her findings at the 2025 Sussex Education Festival.
Steven Follen‘Making it real’ – embedding sustainability and making into the curriculum
Steve’s winning project was featured in another prize winners work – Jeremy Sheldon’s Sussex Innovative Teaching film, For a Better World, which was shown at the 2024 Sussex Education Awards. The film is now being used as part of the package of materials for new academic hires across the university. Steve’s work was also featured in Created by US, The Occasional Sussex Product Design Newsletter, and he presented at the 2024 Sussex Education Festival
Susan RobbinsDevelop Your English: with the UN Sustainable Development Goals
Susan has had a great deal of success with her winning project, part of which was to fund activities associated with the writing and publication of an e-textbook Develop Your English: with the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals , an e-textbook for upper intermediate/advanced level English language learners. Further details of her work around the project can be found in this document.
Olivia TaylorThe Sussex Climate Classroom: A Toolkit for effective and empowering climate education
Xuan Huy NguyenDeveloping entrepreneurial teams among students across disciplines as a strategy to promote inclusivity, belonging and enhanced curricula
The findings from Xuan’s winning project have generated two outputs, which were presented in the form of conference presentations – A Cross-disciplinary Approach To Marketing Education at King’s College, London in 2025, and at the Sussex Education Festival, also in 2025
Other prize winners also presented their project outcomes at the Sussex Education Festival, including:
The impact of the fund continues to be felt across the University – more engaged students, inspired educators, and new ways of thinking across subjects. It’s helping Sussex stay ahead in creating a more inclusive, creative, and student-focused learning environment.
The ICC in Birmingham played host to Digifest 2025 for a two-day flagship learning and technology conference from Jisc. With 900 in-person attendees and 1,700 more joining online, this year’s event boasted its biggest attendance.
Digifest’s full programme featured over 60 sessions, including keynote speakers, panels, workshops, and breakout sessions, across several halls and lecture theatres. There were also 40+ exhibitors. There was no shortage of things to see and engage with, and I must confess I visited the E-Sports stand more than I needed (for work purposes and a shot at the leaderboard).
Here are four of the main themes that I took away with me.
Theme 1 – AI
AI = Acronym Impossible
One of the repeated themes throughout the conference relating to AI was reframing the acronym itself to be more helpful in understanding its use. Professor Paul Iske’s take on AI was that it should be called Assistance Intelligence, challenging us to rethink the role of technology not as a replacement, but as a tool to enhance human creativity and problem-solving. In a different session, AI was described as a sidekick rather than a replacement for teachers. The hopes were that AI could help identify struggling students, automate administrative tasks, and personalise learning experiences.
While Dr Sana Khareghani asked us to think of AI as a practical tool, not a magical fix, referring to AI as artificial assistance rather than intelligence. Sana insists AI is only as powerful as the intent and integrity behind its implementation. What we need for the future of AI is stronger foundations in infrastructure, talent, and data governance.
Investment
In the session “AI in Education: From Hype to Impact”, they spoke about the lack of time for staff and students to ‘properly’ engage with AI tools. They talked about AI being like any other hardware or software: “When you first start using it, you need to read the manual.” It is felt that people are not being given the resources to play with AI and learn how to be effective and critical in its use. With AI-literacy in mind, one speaker advocated for an “AI-way Code.” A generic AI literacy approach supporting staff and students to use any AI tool of their choice. One of their suggestions was to offer an optional 10-credit unit on all courses where students would assess and academically scrutinise the output of AI. This would be completed at the start of a course and could then be applied to future studies.
In several sessions, the discussion turned to apprehension that investing in AI meant a loss of jobs. However, it was felt by some panellists that while concerns are valid, actual loss of employment had not been seen in their experiences. Others see AI use as an opportunity to reduce some of the administrative tasks, “freeing us to concentrate on ‘raw’ teaching and the things that we really enjoy.” One of the panellists made the point that “We should aim to do less with less, instead of doing more with less… Why do we need to do more?” An example of recent change created by AI automation is seen with recruitment chatbots, which are already proving a valuable tool on some institutions’ websites.
As with any technology, it is the implementation that often proves most difficult, and AI is no different. In Paul Iske’s keynote, he spoke of the “final mile” being where we see a lot of failure. It doesn’t matter the size of the affordances of the technology, and with all the best intentions in the world, if the adoption process does not go well, then the project can still fail. Several talks spoke about “Buy In” AKA a Top-Down approach. Investment in the implementation of AI needs to come from all levels, especially from those at the most senior levels of management, for it to succeed. A senior champion to advocate for adoption is a powerful thing, I heard in several panels across the two days.
Ethics
Ethical implications of AI were discussed regarding the data that users hand over. The panel felt that free access comes at a cost in real terms, as people’s personal data and the information fed into an LLM is the sacrifice that is knowingly made. Both speakers talked about having their own recommended AI tools (like CoPilot at UoS), but there are no rules or policies for students using any other tools.
Several panels reported the positive impact of equitable access had on students and staff. It presented opportunities for them to express themselves in different media and allowed for adaptation of some assessments. The cost of site licenses is extremely high, and not all tools are created equally. Therefore, the question is how to offer fair access to AI at the university, without asking people to forgo privacy?
To further compound the issues facing AI use, in Dr Khareghani’s keynote she spoke about the information bias in AI being a reflection of the data and lived experiences being feed into it (mainly western and developed world) and urged institutions to move from being passive users to active creators: “Be an AI Maker, not an AI Taker.”
A key takeaway was “AI is not magic dust, it requires investment in infrastructure, training, and ethical considerations to be truly transformative…” This seemed to be the consensus across the event.
Theme 2 – Failure
FAIL – First Attempt In Learning
Professor Paul Iske (CFO), Chief Failure Officer, delivered an enlightening opening keynote, “Brilliant failures: working together, failing together, learning together”. As the founder of the Institute for Brilliant Failures, he emphasised the value of learning from setbacks.
As part of the opening section of his presentation, the audience was asked to confess their errors, lapses, and failures in just three words, which were then projected in a gigantic word cloud on the main hall screen for all to see. This underscored just how universal the experience of failure is (I had gotten a train ticket to Birmingham International instead of New Street). Iske used this information to emphasise that if we can accept our failings for everyday or mundane things, then is it possible that we can do the same for far more complex and multifaceted issues, such as trying to improve education systems? Maybe, failing at that is not such a bad thing after all.
A brilliant failure can be described as a well-prepared attempt to create value that has a different outcome than what was expected, and with that comes an opportunity to learn. Therefore, we can reframe the cost of failure by looking at the value in failing well. Iske calls this “failing forward”, which is a combination of social intelligence, pattern recognition and creativity leading to failure intelligence (failing well). Using failure intelligence, you are planning for success.
Archetypes of failure
Iske briefly touched on his methodology for failing and its sixteen archetypes. Here are just a few:
The Junk: Persisting with a failing project due to prior investments, leading to further losses.
The Elephant: Overcomplicating solutions, making them unwieldy and ineffective.
The Banana Peel: Small oversights or errors that lead to significant negative outcomes.
The Right Brain Hemisphere: Ignoring creative or intuitive insights, resulting in missed opportunities.
The Empty Spot at the Table: Excluding key stakeholders from decision-making processes results in a lack of support or unforeseen issues.
Image by ChatGPT
His methodology looks really interesting and is something I am keen to explore further in the future (a potential blog post). When we plan a project, does it ever finish exactly as we planned, or did we ‘fail’ and create new ideas and possibilities along the way through divergent thinking? Improvisation and creativity are what separate humans from technology. Iske mentioned overhearing a conversation before the conference in which one of the participants said, “An AI knows everything but understands nothing”.
Theme 3 – Accessibility & Inclusion
The 4Cs
Kellie Mote’s Fireside chat on accessibility, for me, was one of the most impactful sessions of the event. Kellie was in conversation with Piers Wilkinson, who is the Director of the National Association of Disability Practitioners (NADP), who immediately emphasised that all solutions and policies need to use the 4 Cs approach:
Co-produce
Co-create
Co-design
Consultation
Wilkinson is consistently exasperated at retrospective accessibility adaptions being made to new spaces and not embedded in the original design process. He explained that this could be explained, in part, because architects do not have to make buildings accessible by law. Another particularly striking example he gave was the irony of conducting digital poverty surveys online, further highlighting the need for more inclusive design thinking.
Other key takeaways included consulting with students prior to an assessment instead of after they fail. One solution Wilkinson put forward for this was to pay disabled interns to help design accessible courses and assessments during the summer (a win-win solution, he claimed, as there are generally limited summer jobs for disabled people).
The legal precedent set by the Abahart vs. Bristol University case, a case I was not aware of at the time, emphasises the responsibilities facing all university staff. We were reminded that disability is one of the most diverse characteristics, meaning staff have a lot to learn. How confident do we feel in supporting and helping all disabilities?
With regards to training, Wilkinson puts forward the argument for guided tours being more important than immersive experience training. Being in situ and knowing where the issues are and what to do are far more helpful to disabled people needing support. Knowing where fire doors are and how to open them is far better than spending the morning pretending to be disabled, explained the presenter.
Throughout this chat, it was clear that Piers Wilkinson is someone who does not mince his words, and this was further confirmed by his assertion that one of the key things for everyone to do when discussing DEI is to have blunt conversations. “It is better to say something imperfectly and learn than to stay silent…” he urged. “Develop and empower people to talk about DEI even though they have no lived experience”.
What I came away with from this session, aside from the acknowledgement of my current limitations and low confidence in this important and diverse area, was how everything being said led back to one of Iskes’ sixteen archetypes of failure, “The Empty Spot at the Table”. The 4 C’s are imperative to make sure we don’t fail those whom this impacts most.
Theme 4 – Esports (for the win)
When I read the title of this presentation, “If you don’t have an esports curriculum, why not?” I thought I knew the answer. However, just fifteen minutes later, and performing cognitive dissonance on cost and implementation, I had no idea why the University of Sussex hadn’t embraced Esports. The British Esports Federation has qualifications from level 4 to 7 on Business courses (I would also imagine that they could merge into some Informatics courses too). They were showing how Esports can
“…transform your digital strategy and innovate your pedagogical approach and curriculum design to support the future workforce, to address skills gaps and engage a tech-agile, digital generation of young people that are in our classrooms.”
Big Business
The gaming industry’s value surpasses that of film and music combined, I was told. Pastorally, Esports present an opportunity for Sussex to compete nationally and internationally. The championships attract millions of viewers both in person and online. The inaugural Esports Olympics are being held in 2027 in Riyadh, all giving credence to the idea that Esports means business. Having just heard a panel discussion about investment in pastoral care to help secure the future of HE, this talk possibly resonated more strongly than it may have done another time. However, being part of the journey in educating and supporting the future creative workforce behind this industry is an enticing one. Or you could say their sales pitch worked on me.
Final Thought
Digifest 2025 was a whirlwind of ideas, challenges, and opportunities. From embracing failure to reimagining our biological potential. One thing was abundantly clear: no one has got to grips with the current disruption felt by AI.
“Be part of the disruption of AI or prepare to be disrupted by AI”
Khareghani (2025)
The conversations around digital transformation, accessibility, and the future of AI will shape how institutions evolve in the coming years, but it is people who will be leading it. Maybe I am wrong in my assumption, but thankfully, I have never been happier with the idea of making a mistake and learning from it.
Here’s to the next wave of brilliant failures, bold experiments, and transformative learning experiences. Until Digifest 2026!
References
Iske, P., 2021. Institute of Brilliant Failures: Make room to experiment, innovate, and learn. Amsterdam: BIS Publishers.
Welcome to the June 2025 edition of the Academic Developers round up.
Sussex Academic Framework
Most of our focus at the moment is on supporting the implementation of the new Sussex Academic Framework. This includes providing direct support and guidance to our faculties, via bespoke workshops.
We’re also helping to develop guidance and resources on the Sussex Academic Framework support site on Canvas. We’re also adapting and updating our resources so they better align with the Sussex Academic Framework and the Curriculum Design Principles within.
If you have any questions regarding this please email your Academic Developer or Amanda Bolt.
The Learning Matters site has a new look. We’ve a new banner image and the tags have been streamlined the tags to make it easier to search for case studies, in particular those aligned to Sussex curriculum design principles, framework and strategic priorities. If you would like to contribute to Learning Matters there are various ways to do so, please visit our About page to find out more.
A new Learning Matters article, What I have learnt from grading students on their participation, by Paven Basuita (Assistant Professor in Law) reflects on her experience of grading students on participation in Clinical Legal Education. She argues that assessing participation can offer a holistic, inclusive, and continuous evaluation of student learning. However, she also acknowledges the challenges of such an assessment and provides practical recommendations for others looking to assess participation in their own teaching.
Edinburgh Napier University have launched a new (free) Coursera course: Transforming Higher Education with GenAI: Enhancing Teaching, Learning and Student Engagement.
Designed for educators, administrators, and technologists, the course explores how GenAI tools can support teaching, learning, and institutional practices – while critically engaging with their limitations, biases, and ethical dilemmas.
Rather than offering simple solutions, the course focuses on helping you reflect on your own context, experiment safely, and develop tangible resources like lesson plans, policy frameworks, or teaching strategies that you can take back to your work.
Educational Enhancement Office Move!
Educational Enhancement will be saying goodbye to our home in the library this week, as we are moving to Level 1, Bramber House.
It’s that time of year again when we start thinking about setting up our Canvas module sites for the next academic year.
Earlier this year members of Educational Enhancement worked with student connectors on a project to review and improve Canvas module templates.
While there will be a more in-depth blog post later with more detail of the whole project, we wanted to share some tips for improving your Canvas modules, based on feedback from students and colleagues as part of the project, to help you when setting up your Canvas module sites for 25/26.
Accessible PowerPoints
Students said: “Some uploaded PowerPoints on Canvas have vital information hidden behind animations or off-screen”
If PowerPoints include animations (i.e. transitions, etc), these will not work in the on-screen preview within Canvas.
If animations are included, ensure students are given the instruction to download them, or create a version of the slides which do not include animations.
Use the Accessibility Checker to ensure your presentation is accessible before uploading to Canvas
Clear Assignment Signposting
Students said: “Assessment information and assessments are in different locations which can be irritating”
Include a link to the module’s Assignments screen on your Assessment Information page (Note – the page which provides assessment information to students may be labelled differently, depending on which school template you are currently using):
Open Assessment information page
Click Edit in the top right
Type “Submit assignment here” below each assessment detail
Highlight the text
Change the formatting so that it is obvious amongst other text on the page
With the text still highlighted, click the link icon on the toolbar
Select Module link
Select Module Navigation from the pane on the right
Select Assignments from the list of options
Ensure this is labelled and formatted in such a way to make its purpose obvious to students (e.g. “Submit your assignment here” in a large bold font)
Adding files to pages
Academic Colleagues said: “I wish it was easier to add files to a page without first uploading to the Files area.”
Follow the module set-up guidance for your school when setting up your 25/26 modules. There are some important changes this year, due to the Student Information System project to replace Sussex Direct and our central student database.
If you have any questions about setting up your 25/26 Canvas module site, please contact your Learning Technologist via educationalenhancement@sussex.ac.uk.
Talks and workshops are taking place throughout the week highlighting some of the excellent inclusive teaching and assessment practices at Sussex, and there’s still time for you to sign up Review the programme and sign up now.
The Sussex Education Festival
The Sussex Education Festivalis back for its third year and will be held on Friday 2 May (9.30-3:30pm) in the Woodland Rooms at the Student Centre.
Registration is now open! We’d like to encourage all colleagues involved in teaching and learning to register to attend. The Festival will consist of a number of different session types from speakers from all faculties. This will include lightning talks, case studies and panel discussions, which are focused around themes such as inclusion and belonging, student engagement, generative AI, embedding employability, group work, and outdoor learning. The full programme will be available shortly.
We’re excited to celebrate and reflect on all the amazing work that goes in to teaching and learning here at Sussex. We hope to see you there!
We welcome all colleagues at the University to write a blog, or an article, present a case study, or to collaborate on a podcast around their teaching and/or around student learning at Sussex. If you would like to contribute or would like to find out more please contact k.r.horne@sussex.ac.uk.
Gen AI Practical tips for teachers
The popular University of Kent Digitally Enhanced Education webinars last week focused on AI in Assessment – How Universities Are Responding and Innovating. The recordings are now available if you’d like to catch up or share them with colleagues.
The Advance HE ‘Let’s Talk About Student Success’ Podcast
Join the Advance HE monthly conversations with higher education’s thought leaders – a space where insights flow as freely as coffee, and where experience meets innovation in supporting student success.
Participate in a research project
Take part in a project being conducted by colleagues from a number of UK Universities into personal tutoring and academic advising practices within UK HE. The study consists of a short survey which will take approx. 15 minutes to complete.
In May 2024, I wrote a post titled ‘What if our students with disabilities didn’t have to jump through hoops to have an equitable experience.’ You’ll be forgiven for not having read it, it never saw the light of day (hence the very un-catchy title). Amongst the noise of a never-ending flurry of AI related content, I never quite got it finished. In it I had a meandering wander through my thoughts and experience about the onerous admin, lack of agency and impacts on cognitive load a student with disabilities may experience. Naturally given we’re in the ‘AI is mentioned in all the things’ era, the topic came up. It made the case that university policies and guidance on the use of generative AI technology for teaching, learning and assessment may inadvertently put students with Disabled Students Allowance funded software at odds with academic integrity policies.
Fast forward ten months and the topic, with little shock to anyone, is not only still very relevant but becoming more so. Then an email thread shared with me recently resurrected the ideas. Discussed in the email was the complexities of approving software in a space where the software companies themselves can update tools to add AI ‘features’ without notice, students understanding or awareness of institutional policies can’t fairly be relied on and the DSA assessor’s ability to find them is an us problem not a them problem. So here is that post, dusted off and made fit for 2025.
As anyone in the Learning Technology game will tell you, conversations are largely dominated by generative AI. Recently, we have been testing a tool called Jamworks. In short, the tool generates a transcript of a recording, for example a recorded lecture, then uses said transcript for a number of very well thought out AI tools such as summaries, key points, flashcards etc. As part of our conversations around the use of such tools in the classroom, was how this would be hugely valuable to someone who relies on a notetaker. These notes are generated almost immediately, they don’t require waiting on the notetaker to send them on and unlike with the human notetaker, the student can ask questions of the notes, whereas the human notetaker may not be a subject expert. In other words, the technology enables much more autonomy and independence than existing approaches with human notetakers. This is of course just one example, there are many.
We know assistive technologies provided through assessment are essential for students. However, in an increasingly complex technology environment, how do we ensure the technology doesn’t put students at odds with academic integrity?
It’s a trap
As noted, advances in technology have a lot of opportunity to make things better for people with disabilities, we ignore and suppress them at our peril. A concern though is how easy it might be to indirectly create barriers through the wording and enforcement of academic integrity policies or directly through mitigations. For example, it would be possible for someone relying on a tool such as Grammarly to fall foul of the proof-reading policy. Further, we’ve seen an increase in inaccessible content like photos of text be uploaded to quizzes to prevent AI tools copying text, overlooking the fact that optical character recognition (OCR) or the ability for software to read text in an image, is getting the same AI love as everything else. This is simply not an acceptable approach, but it highlights the immediate response HE has taken to advances in technology and that is one of pulling up the drawbridge and bolstering defences by compromising on accessibility and if you’re caught on the other side, you’re kind of on your own… for now.
However, for the most part our students do not fall foul of policy in using these tools routinely for teaching and learning. Our Skills Hub guidance on Grammarly:
‘Can I use Grammarly? It’s fine to use Grammarly to improve basic grammar, spelling and punctuation errors. However, you should not use Grammarly’s generative AI features to meaningfully change your work. The same restrictions apply to Grammarly as they do to a proofreader, and you should think carefully about which changes you accept, as it remains your responsibility to ensure the accuracy of your work.’
Sam Hemsley, Academic Developer follows up:
‘As above, just using AI in an assistive capacity isn’t contravening any rules/isn’t academic misconduct (for students with DSA provided assistive tech and those using genAI tools in general). There is nothing, inherently, wrong with AI being built into assistive tech. As with Grammarly, I suspect the onus is currently on the student to ensure use of such tools doesn’t contravene academic integrity policy and/or explicit permissions from module convenors, should they allow use of AI in the creation of assessed submissions.’
Who’s problem is it anyway?
Given the demands already placed on this group of students, having them need to police the software they get recommended is perhaps a stretch too far. As Learning Technologist Helen Morley points out.
‘It wouldn’t be appropriate to place the onus on the students to police the assistive technology (AT) they have been given […]. As for AT they’ve sourced/bought themselves, I’d be wary of the providers advising them of any changes in a way which is clear and accessible enough. Of course, students use AT for a variety of reasons but for those who already managing pressure on their executive function, energy levels, stress levels etc. this is an unreasonable expectation and turns something from assistive to prohibitive.’
I have to agree and whilst we need to look at reducing this extraneous demand, I strongly believe one way in which we can do this is by (yes you guessed it) building the digital capabilities of our staff and student body. Being able to have an informed discussion with your assessor doesn’t place the onus on you but enables you to feel more at ease with the solutions provided. Conversely, teaching staff will be more familiar with the tools, the capabilities, and the needs they are addressing and between them all, know where the boundaries are and how to avoid crossing them. Sounds too good to be true? Maybe, maybe not, but it has to be worth a try.
I don’t think it’s a stretch to say improvement in skills equates to an improvement in equity. Yes, I can hear you saying what about curriculum design, and you’re right, it’s a key element. Frameworks such as Universal Design for Learning and the university’s own curriculum review will address some of the challenges we’re seeing, but my view is that to engage meaningfully with the ‘threat or opportunity’ of advances in technology it’s fundamentally a skills question.
Skills led equity
There are number of barriers to mass adoption of Generative AI associated skills development: resources, content, training, time, willing, strategic direction, language being just a few. So where do you start with addressing these challenges?
I suggest language is the starting point, a common language of digital skills, what’s the difference between a chatbot and an LLM, how do I talk to my students about ‘hallucinations’, what about relying on summarised text. Does everyone use the same terms in the same way? When a DSA assessor is looking for institutional policy on use of Generative AI tools, wouldn’t it be easier if the terminology was the same across the institutions? A reach I know but makes the point.
So, what do we do about it?
My call to action here is to think explicitly about the digital skills you and your students have and where you might like to make improvements in confidence to ensure a fair, equitable and barrier free approach to the use of assistive technology for those that need it. Start by talking to your students who are using this stuff and find out how they are using it. It may then follow that when a student is assessed they are more able to understand the implications of certain technologies on your teaching and assessment.
Then, find opportunities to engage with the conversation, whether it be the internal AI summit (deadline 28th March 2025 for contribution), the AI in Education Community of Practice, or other development opportunities on these topics. We’re all learning as we go on this stuff, come join us.
We are the Educational Enhancement team at the University of Sussex. We publish posts each fortnight about the use of technology to support teaching and learning. Read more about us.
