Relevant Documents and Contextual Challenges

I began my ARP by reflecting on my teaching in the Spring and Summer terms of 2025 (because early 2025 is when AI coding tools such as “vibe coding” have risen). I wrote down a list of issues I have noticed:

• The UAL Student Guide to Generative AI is not tailored to the context of CCI. Students at CCI use Generative AI not just for writing, but also for a range of programming practices (e.g., coding, debugging, explaining codebase, setting up workspaces, writing code repository description).
• The guidelines we gave to students on AI disclosure in coding are superficial. For instance, we require students to keep a log of the use of AI, but how do they do this? When to do this? What to include in the log? This can lead to unintended academic misconduct.
• The perception of AI (the consequences, risks, and broader impacts) varies across students.
• Commercial AI coding assistants offer subscription services, which give access to higher-quality AI models: this is an inequal access to technical resources.

I looked at the relevant guidelines and principles that have been proposed. Below, I’ll list some of the documents in higher education in response to the use of GenAI.

1. The Russell Group principles on the use of generative AI tools in education (Russell Group, 2023) make a stance of moving toward the ethical and responsible use of GenAI, including: “2. Staff should be equipped to support students to use generative AI tools effectively and appropriately in their learning experience. 4. Universities will ensure academic rigour and integrity is upheld.”
2. In response, the UAL Position Statement on AI (UAL, 2025a) calls for the need to tailor and adapt these guidelines to specific creative disciplines: “Appropriate use of AI is likely to differ between the creative disciplines. We will encourage staff to consider how these tools might be applied appropriately for different student groups or those with specific learning needs.”
3. The AI and Teaching Q&As (UAL, 2025b), as a staff-facing document, highlights: “Create a clear expectation of AI in advance of students commencing assessed work (define acceptable use).” “Incorporate discussion about our AI guidance.” “Be aware of the context and the learning outcome“.
4. The Student Guide to Generative AI (UAL, 2025c), as a student-facing document, explains academic misconduct with GenAI and highlights the importance of keeping track of the use of GenAI.
5. The AI Guidance Summary provides a list of sources and a summary of the use of AI (LCC, 2023):

In addition, the proceedings of the Resistance AI Workshop include several articles that have mentioned the risk of how colonialism, militarism, and imperialism can lead to the resistance of AI tools in an academic context (Agnew et al., 2020).

Reference list at: https://jaspersz.myblog.arts.ac.uk/2025/11/20/arp-references/