"Oh, Im being judged" - Kerrianne Orriss

"Oh, Im being judged" - Kerrianne Orriss

• 1.
  “Oh, I'm beingjudged!” Responding to students' concerns and needs around AI literacy Kerrianne B. Orriss University of Bristol
• 2.
  Co-developing AI teaching resources 1.Project aims and methods 2. Key takeaways from the survey and focus groups 3. The activities 4. Lessons learned and what’s next? 5. Q&A
• 3.
  Aims of theproject Project team Co-develop activities and resources with and for students that support their critical understanding of, and participation in, AI tools. Produce data on student use, understanding and skill development needs around AI, giving insight into how this may vary across faculties and student groups. Dr Alison Oldfield Lecturer, School of Education Rosey Crow Subject Librarian, Education Tim Worth, Study Skills Co-Ordinator (Library Services) Christy Fisher Teaching and Learning Librarian Maxime Perrott Student Research Partner Kerrianne Orriss Teaching and learning Librarian
• 4.
  Many HE studentsare increasingly using AI across their studies and in inequitable ways (Freeman, 2024; 2025) HE students can be unclear about what AI is or its appropriate use (Tierney et al., 2025) Student voice on AI is fundamental in developing educational policies and practices (Sullivan, 2023; Tierney et al., 2025) Why?
• 5.
  Stage 1 (Jan25) Online student survey (N = 402)  Mixed methods: questions about AI use, needs and concerns Stage 2 (Mar-May 25) Co-developing activities through focus groups (N=29)  Analysed results (descriptive and content analysis)  Used findings to develop resources  Gathered feedback on activities via four paired workshops and focus groups How? ethics approval pilot survey Uni-wide survey activities focus groups transcriptions data analysis findings report
• 6.
  • Majority eitherYear 1 UG (27%) or Masters students (27%) • 56% aged 18-21 years old • 64% home students • 27% spoke English as a Second Language • 32% identify as having a disability Survey sample 42% 36% 19% 3% Percentage of student respondents from each faculty Arts, Law and Social Sciences Science and Engineering Health and Life Sciences Multiple Faculty or Other
• 7.
  Which concerns doyou have about using AI tools? (N=399) Environmental impact Misinformation and lack of reliability Data safety and privacy Copyright issues Algorithmic bias / biased information Accusations of cheating Equity of access and use 98% 86% 74% 74% 72% 37% 28% 41% 75% 50% 47% 53% 66% 19% As % of users As % of active refusers Responses
• 8.
  “I think AIis fundamentally unethical and environmentally damaging and should not be used.” “I know some specific AI tools are useful, but I am not confident I could sort out the good from the bad.” “[We need] some idea of the futures we are facing when we graduate in fields changed by AI.” “They talk about… having your critical thinking mindset on, but what specifically should I do?” Free-text responses from the survey and focus groups
• 9.
  What informed our activities? •Students want to be taught critical evaluation skills in relation to AI tools and outputs • Free text responses highlighted antipathy towards AI for ethical reasons, especially around environmental impact – we need to respect the right to opt out • Feedback from focus groups suggests a preference for analogue activities alongside digital ones
• 10.
  Activity: Drawing AI Purpose •Respond to the survey’s range of relationships with AI • Recognise the importance of emotional responses to AI • Foster discussions about AI in non-judgmental and non- technical ways Feedback • Valued the creative and playful aspects as a discussion-starter • Appreciated sharing the range of experiences, emotions and responses around AI
• 11.
  Activity: AI CRAAP Test Purpose •Respond to students asking for tools in evaluating AI outputs • Provide a practical framework to use Feedback • Valued the practical and reflective nature of the activity • When multi-disciplinary discussion, hard to find relevant examples to evaluate
• 12.
  Activity: Academic Integrity Scenarios Purpose •Respond to student concerns over accusations of cheating • Develop skills in interpreting university guidance • Provide forum to discuss academic integrity concerns Feedback • “I now understand why certain actions were flagged as problematic… I’ve not really been able to understand the intricacy behind it” • Frustration that answers are not clear-cut Scenario 4: Literature searching Yuling wants to find key literature on their chosen topic. They don’t know how to use Web of Science, but they have a SciSpace account and use this instead. Discuss if this is… Green: appropriate and acceptable Amber: problematic Red: inappropriate and unacceptable
• 13.
  Activity: Dilemma Cards Purpose •Respond to students asking for discussion on ethics and AI • To situate AI use within wider social contexts and debate its range of implications in education (Williamson, 2020) Feedback • Students appreciated the opportunity to discuss complex aspects of AI beyond how to use it in assessment • It generated A LOT of debate
• 14.
  Activities: Sustainability Puzzles andAI Card Quest Purpose • Introduce game play to engage students • Foster discussions and awareness about AI ethics Feedback • “The environmental regulation aspect… opened my eyes to a whole lot of stuff I didn’t know about before” • Difficult to compare ‘like for like’ – students questioned data comparisons • Not for all learning styles – can adapt as discussion cards
• 15.
  Your turn! True orfalse? Environment 10-40 ChatGPT prompts require more water than a pair of jeans Hold up the green tick for ‘true’, red cross for ‘false’ The answer is:
• 16.
  Your turn! Roll thedice… Data You need to create an image for a website. Do you use CoPilot or Stable Diffusion? Write down a number between 1 and 6, then hold it up! If you rolled: 1-3: Oh no! Getty Images sued Stability AI, owners of Stable Diffusion. Your image has the Getty trademark. Lose the card! 4-6: Phew! You used Copilot University of Bristol account with data protection. Your image is safe to use. Keep the card!
• 17.
  • There’s powerin a union – try joining a learning set! • Student voice is crucial – how can we incorporate their voices earlier in the process, and later down the line? • A varied toolkit of activities is useful to support the learning style of the student – but pleasing everyone is impossible! • ‘Teaching’ AI is hard….. Lessons learned Image: Instagram, University of Bristol UNISON, https://www.instagram.com/unison_bristol_uni/
• 18.
  …to reflect andbe kind to ourselves! We are striving to: • Balance the range of student views and needs around AI • Not be disheartened by low engagement • Keep up to date with changing AI policies and technological developments • ‘Read all the things’ - how many distribution lists are we on? • Avoid overwhelm Take a moment… Image: ‘Clean all the things!’, Allie Brosh, https://hyperboleandahalf.blogspot.com
• 19.
  What next? • Developmaterials in response to new technology and student feedback • New workshop on AI search tools • Further collaboration with Schools • Deep dive into the data – what else can we learn? • Further exploration of active refusal • Experiences of neurodivergent and disabled students around AI
• 20.
  Further information • Ourfindings and recommendations report • Open access activities (CC BY-NC-SA) • BILT blogs outlining the project and describing our co-delivered workshops with the School of Educa tion • AI and the Library (University of Bristol LibGuide) • Feel free to get in touch at k.b.orriss@bristol.ac.uk
• 21.
  References Brosh, A. (2020)Hyperbole and a Half. Available at: https://hyperboleandahalf.blogspot.com/ (Accessed: 12 March 2026). Freeman, J. (2024) Provide or punish? Students’ views on generative AI in higher education. Policy Note 51. Higher Education Policy Institute. Available at: https://www.hepi.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/HEPI-Policy-Note-51.pdf (Accessed: 15 July 2025). Freeman, J. (2025) Student Generative AI Survey 2025. Policy Note 61. Higher Education Policy Institute. Available at: https://www.hepi.ac.uk/2025/02/26/student-generative-ai-survey-2025/ (Accessed: 21 March 2025). Oldfield, A.M. et al. (2025) Survey report: University of Bristol student use, views, concerns and support needs about AI in their studies. Available at: https://research-information.bris.ac.uk/en/publications/survey-report-university-of-bristol-student-use-views-concerns-an/. Sullivan, M., Kelly, A. and McLaughlan, P. (2023) ‘ChatGPT in higher education: Considerations for academic integrity and student learning’, Journal of Applied Learning & Teaching, 6(1). Available at: https://doi.org/10.37074/jalt.2023.6.1.17. Tierney, A., Peasey, P. and Gould, J. (2025) ‘Student perceptions on the impact of AI on their teaching and learning experiences in higher education’, Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 20, p. 005. Available at: https://doi.org/10.58459/rptel.2025.20005. Williamson, B. and Eynon, R. (2020) ‘Historical threads, missing links, and future directions in AI in education’, Learning, Media and Technology [Preprint]. Available at: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/17439884.2020.1798995 (Accessed: 21 July 2025).
• 22.
  Additional examples of free-text
• 23.
  “Because of mydisability, I find it hard to understand sometimes simply language. I often use AI to make it easier to understand. I also struggle with social skills for the same reason and worry that I come across as rude when I am just literal.” Free text from the student survey
• 24.
  “With English asmy second language, I have to learn hard to write or speak ‘natively,’ sometimes from AI. I'm afraid that I'll be accused of plagiarism for simply using the language I learned. But if I don't learn to write ‘natively,’ my coursework will get less marks than native speakers.” Free text from the student focus group