Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) refers to a category of artificial intelligence technologies that can produce original content—such as text, images, code, audio, or video—by learning patterns from large datasets. Unlike traditional AI tools that classify or retrieve existing information, GenAI tools create new outputs in response to user prompts.

In higher education, GenAI is most visible through tools like ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini (formerly Bard), and Copilot. These tools are powered by large language models (LLMs), which generate human-like responses to a wide range of queries. They can help draft documents, summarize readings, translate language, simulate conversations, and more.

For instructors, GenAI presents both opportunities and challenges. It can support teaching by facilitating brainstorming, providing writing support, and offering adaptive feedback. At the same time, it raises questions about academic integrity, authorship, bias, and the evolving role of educators in the classroom. With generative AI rapidly developing, educators play a key role in thoughtfully evaluating its applications in instruction and learning environments.

ChatGPT is a conversational artificial intelligence tool developed by OpenAI. It allows users to input prompts and receive responses in natural, human-like language. The system is powered by a large language model (LLM), which was trained on massive amounts of text data to generate coherent and contextually relevant responses.

ChatGPT works by predicting the most likely next words in a sequence, based on patterns in its training data. It doesn’t “understand” content in a human sense and may produce outputs that are inaccurate, outdated, or fabricated—particularly with citations or technical claims. Because it mimics language rather than verifying facts, users should critically assess its responses and avoid treating it as an authoritative source.

Despite these limitations, ChatGPT can be a helpful tool for teaching, learning, and research. It can assist with drafting content, revising text, summarizing material, generating ideas, and modeling academic language.

The University of South Carolina provides free access to ChatGPT through an institutional license with OpenAI. This provides access to GPT-4, a more advanced model capable of producing longer and more contextually accurate responses than the free version (GPT-3.5).  All USC faculty, staff, and students can log in using their university credentials.

Visit the Garnet AI Foundry for access to instructions, training updates, and links to campus AI initiatives for faculty and staff.

Copilot is Microsoft’s generative AI assistant available in two forms. The first is Copilot in the Edge browser, which is free to USC faculty and accessible with university credentials. It offers features like summarizing web pages, assisting with research, and comparing content across open tabs. Microsoft Edge is recommended for the best experience.

The second version is Copilot integrated into Microsoft 365 applications such as Word, Excel, PowerPoint, Outlook, and Teams. This version provides in-app support for writing, summarizing, analyzing data, and generating presentations. It is not included by default and must be purchased separately through the university. Faculty interested in licensing should contact their department or the Division of Information Technology.

Claude is a generative AI assistant developed by Anthropic and named after Claude Shannon, a pioneer in information theory. Known for its emphasis on safety and clear structure, Claude performs well on tasks that involve detailed instructions, long-form content, or reasoning. It is designed to minimize biased or harmful responses and is being integrated into select productivity platforms and enterprise tools. Like other GenAI tools, Claude can generate summaries, answer questions, assist with writing, and respond to prompts with structured output.

Gemini (formerly Bard) is a generative AI tool developed by Google that supports tasks such as writing, summarizing, translating, and answering questions. It integrates with Google Workspace tools like Docs, Gmail, and Sheets, and can generate outlines, code, slide content, and creative formats. Gemini also has access to real-time web data, making it useful for addressing current topics; however, like all GenAI tools, it may produce inaccurate or oversimplified content and should be used with critical awareness.

Generative AI is already playing a growing role across higher education, with faculty, instructors, and students exploring its potential to support a variety of academic tasks.

In teaching, instructors use GenAI tools to help draft syllabi, revise assignments, create rubrics, write quiz questions, and generate discussion prompts. Some also use it to rewrite or summarize content to improve clarity or accessibility, especially for multilingual learners. GenAI can also generate sample student writing or offer automated feedback suggestions to use in class.

For student learning, GenAI is often used to summarize readings, brainstorm essay ideas, generate practice questions, or revise drafts. Students may also use it to practice language skills or request explanations in simpler or alternative formats. Faculty are increasingly designing activities that ask students to analyze, critique, or refine AI-generated content, which can deepen critical thinking.

Outside the classroom, faculty and staff are using GenAI to write professional emails, summarize meeting notes, organize grant proposals, or draft abstracts and research summaries. In STEM fields, GenAI tools are also being used to generate starter code or mathematical expressions for instructional examples.

The key across all uses is intentionality. Generative AI should support—not replace—the expertise, relationships, and decision-making that define good teaching. Instructors are encouraged to explore AI's benefits while maintaining clear expectations, critical awareness, and a focus on student learning.

While generative AI tools like ChatGPT, Claude, and Gemini offer new possibilities in teaching and learning, they also have important limitations that faculty and students should understand. These tools do not “understand” content in a human sense. Instead, they generate responses by predicting likely word sequences based on patterns in the data they were trained on.

One significant limitation is hallucination, where the AI produces content that sounds plausible but is incorrect, misleading, or entirely fabricated. This can include inaccurate explanations, misrepresented concepts, or fake citations. Even when asked for factual information, GenAI tools may confidently present responses that require verification.

Another constraint is the knowledge cutoff of some models. Depending on the version and provider, the AI may not reflect recent research, terminology, or events. While newer models like GPT-4 may include web access, not all tools do, and real-time accuracy is not guaranteed.

These tools also reflect biases present in their training data. This can influence tone, representation, or framing, particularly in areas involving race, gender, culture, or politics. Instructors should be alert to these issues and prepared to help students evaluate AI-generated content critically.

Finally, GenAI tools can struggle with multi-step reasoning, logic, and nuance. They may oversimplify complex ideas, misinterpret assignments, or produce content that lacks depth. This is especially important in disciplines that prioritize analytical thinking, precise language, or evidence-based writing.

Because of these limitations, generative AI should be used to support and not replace expert judgment, subject matter knowledge, and academic integrity in teaching and learning.

While generative AI tools like ChatGPT, Claude, and Gemini offer new possibilities in teaching and learning, they also have important limitations that faculty and students should understand. These tools do not “understand” content in a human sense. Instead, they generate responses by predicting likely word sequences based on patterns in the data they were trained on.

One significant limitation is hallucination, where the AI produces content that sounds plausible but is incorrect, misleading, or entirely fabricated. This can include inaccurate explanations, misrepresented concepts, or fake citations. Even when asked for factual information, GenAI tools may confidently present responses that require verification.

Another constraint is the knowledge cutoff of some models. Depending on the version and provider, the AI may not reflect recent research, terminology, or events. While newer models like GPT-4 may include web access, not all tools do, and real-time accuracy is not guaranteed.

These tools also reflect biases present in their training data. This can influence tone, representation, or framing, particularly in areas involving race, gender, culture, or politics. Instructors should be alert to these issues and prepared to help students evaluate AI-generated content critically.

Finally, GenAI tools can struggle with multi-step reasoning, logic, and nuance. They may oversimplify complex ideas, misinterpret assignments, or produce content that lacks depth. This is especially important in disciplines that prioritize analytical thinking, precise language, or evidence-based writing.

Because of these limitations, generative AI should be used to support and not replace expert judgment, subject matter knowledge, and academic integrity in teaching and learning.

Get familiar with ChatGPT and other Generative AI. Instructors and students might benefit from learning how to effectively use them.  in the teaching and learning process. Doing so includes training on how to use the system, how to formulate effective questions, and how to interpret responses.

Before using ChatGPT and other Generative AI, it is important to clearly define the learning outcomes, assessments, instructional content, and activities for the course. This will help ensure that these tools are used in a way that is aligned with the overall learning outcomes for the course.

Communicate to students what ChatGPT and other Generative AI are and their limitations. They are not perfect and may make mistakes or provide incomplete information. It is important to be clear with students about its limitations.

Students may need guidance on how to use these tools effectively, including how to phrase questions, how to interpret responses, and how to evaluate the quality of the information provided. It may be helpful to provide examples of effective and ineffective uses of ChatGPT and other Generative AI.

These tools can be used in conjunction with other instructional technologies, such as recorded video lectures and interactive simulations. This can help create a more engaging and interactive learning experience for students.

Incorporate ChatGPT and other Generative AI as part of a larger instructional strategy. They can be a valuable tool to support learning, users should not rely on it as the sole means of instruction. It is important to integrate ChatGPT into a broader instructional strategy that includes other forms of teaching practices, learning activities, and assessments.

It is important to continuously evaluate and refine Generative AI use to ensure that it is meeting the learning objectives and to identify areas for improvement. This can involve analyzing student performance data and soliciting feedback from students and other instructors.

Emphasize the importance of academic integrity. Foster a culture of academic integrity by encouraging students to take responsibility for their own academic work, promoting honesty and integrity, and discouraging cheating and plagiarism.

Monitor student use of ChatGPT and other Generative AI. To ensure that ChatGPT is being used effectively, encourage students to monitor their use of the tool. Identify any issues or concerns. This can be done through periodic check-ins, analyzing chat logs, or asking students to reflect on their own use of ChatGPT.

Monitor and evaluate Generative AI performance. Instructors should regularly monitor and evaluate the accuracy and effectiveness of ChatGPT in responding to student’s questions and concerns. This will help ensure that ChatGPT is providing accurate and helpful responses to students.

Authentic assessment: Use authentic assessments that reflect real-world scenarios and require students to demonstrate their skills and knowledge in practical applications. For example, you could ask students to design and carry out a scientific experiment or analyze a real-world case study.

Higher-order thinking: Design assessments that require higher-order thinking skills, such as critical thinking, problem-solving, and creativity. These types of assessments are less likely to be replicated by ChatGPT and require students to apply their knowledge and skills in novel ways.

Collaborative learning: Design assessments that require collaboration between students. Generative AI may be able to assist with individual tasks, but it cannot replace the benefits of working in teams and engaging in collaborative learning. For example, you could ask students to work together on a group project or participate in a debate or discussion.

Feedback: Provide timely and constructive feedback to students on their performance. This can help students identify areas of strength and weakness and improve their learning outcomes. Generative AI can provide automated feedback, but it cannot replace the value of personalized feedback from a human.

By using multiple assessments (i.e., traditional tests, essays, projects, presentations, and performance-based assessments), instructors can ensure that students are evaluated on a range of skills and knowledge, making it more difficult for Generative AI to replicate the assessments.

Get Creative With Your Assignments

Here are 10 ideas for creative assignments adapted for a classroom with chatGPT. Don’t stop with these — get creative. You can mitigate the risk of students using chatGPT to cheat, and at the same time improve their knowledge and skills for appropriately using new AI technologies inside and outside the classroom.

1. Prompt Competition

1. Identify a major question or challenge in your field or discipline that chatGPT could write about. Preferably a question with no clear single right answer.
2. Have students collaborate (in pairs or small teams) on developing 5 to 10 criteria for assessing chatGPT responses to the major question. For example, chatGPT’s output references more than one theoretical perspective.
3. Ask students to individually write a prompt for chatGPT to answer the major question.
4. Have students use their criteria to judge the responses of other students (in the pair or small team), and rate the chatGPT prompts/responses from best to worst.

2. Reflect and Improve

1. Ask students to individually identify a major question or challenge in your field or discipline that chatGPT could write about.
2. Have students use chatGPT to write a response to their question or challenge.
3. Ask students to reflect on chatGPT’s output (e.g., what is correct, incorrect, what they don’t know if it is correct or incorrect, what should they look up elsewhere to verify, what should they ask chatGPT next).
4. Using Track Changes in MS Word or Suggesting in Google Docs, have students improve the output of chatGPT (e.g., correcting errors or misinformation, expanding on shallow content).
5. Have students submit their prompt and the improved chatGPT response with their added content highlighted.

3. Re-vision

1. Ask students to individually identify a major question or challenge in your field or discipline that chatGPT could write about.
2. Have students use chatGPT to write a response to their question or challenge.
3. Have students revise (write again) chatGPT’s output from a different angel. For instance, take a different perspective, apply a critical lens, expand on a particular concept, or correct aspects of the output that could cause their peers to misunderstand or misinterpret.

4. Dual Assignments

1. Give students a choice between two versions of the same assignment. One version for those that want to use chatGPT and one for those who don’t.
2. For those who choose to use chatGPT, they have to submit their prompt(s) and the chatGPT output. Using Track Changes in MS Word or Suggesting in Google Docs, have students add depth, clarify misinformation, offer alternative perspectives, and make other improvements to the chatGPT output.
3. For those who choose to complete the assignment without chatGPT, they should complete the assignment and sign a statement that chatGPT was not used.
4. Grade both assignments on how well students illustrate their depth of knowledge through either (a) their changes to chatGPT’s output, or (b) their original writing.

5. Mind Maps

1. Since chatGPT can’t natively make visual representations of content (see note below), have students create mind maps (aka, associative maps, spider map, process maps) to illustrate the connections between ideas, concepts, approaches, or theories in your field or discipline.
2. The more details or levels that students add to their mind minds, the easier it will be for them to demonstrate their newly acquired knowledge and skills.

6. Debates

1. Have students debate a major question or challenge in your field or discipline. Even short debates can deepen learning and get students to look at topics from varied perspectives.
2. You can choose if students are allowed to use chatGPT in their preparation for the debate’s opening statements.
3. Debates can be done in different formats, and the length of times for speeches can vary depending on how much time and how many students are in your course.

7. Videos or Podcasts

1. Rather than written essays, have students make videos or audio recordings as the medium for sharing their knowledge.
2. Using a video-based tool (such as VoiceThread, FlipGrid, or Zoom) can make the process easier for students.
3. Students can also record audio podcasts on their phone or computer if visuals are not required for the content of the assignment.

8. Explain Your Thinking

1. Give the assignment as usual, but in addition require that students use Using Track Changes in MS Word or Suggesting in Google Docs to explain at least 8 to 10 steps of their thinking as comments added to the text.
2. Students can describe, for instance, the steps in their logic, their problem solving or writing process, or the development of their theoretical path.
3. Students could also document their thinking with audio recordings or videos.

9. 2x2 Matrix

1. Have students create a 2x2 matrix relating two concepts covered in the course. For instance, what are shared and different defining characteristics of concepts or processes.
2. A simpler version of this assignment is to have students develop Venn Diagrams for comparing important concepts or processes.

10. Next Time

1. Ask students to use chatGPT to answer an essay question about a major question or challenge in your field or discipline.
2. Have students reflect on their learning about the topic based on using chatGPT, and to write down 5 things they learned about the topic from chatGPT.
3. Have students design a new assignment that doesn’t allow for the use of chatGPT but that would allow them (or other students) to demonstrate their learning. For example, they might suggest a group project, or mind map assignment.

Reference

Watkins, R. (2022, December 18). Update Your Course Syllabus for ChatGPT [web log]. Retrieved January 31, 2023

Instructors should educate students on the importance of academic honesty and integrity. They should explain to students that using AI-powered tools like ChatGPT is not a substitute for their critical thinking and analysis and that they must ensure that their work is original and properly cited.

Instructors should provide students with clear instructions on how to use Generative AI in their assignments. This includes guidelines on how to cite the tool as a source and how to integrate its output into their work.

Instructors should encourage students to think critically when using ChatGPT. They should explain that the tool is only as good as the input it receives and that students must carefully evaluate the relevance and accuracy of the tool's output.

Instructors should monitor students' use of Generative AI to ensure that they are using the tool ethically and responsibly. They should look for signs of plagiarism or other forms of academic misconduct.

Instructors should use multiple assessment methods to evaluate students' work. This can help reduce the temptation for students to rely solely on Generative AI to complete their assignments.

Instructors should provide feedback on student work that highlights areas where they can improve their use of Generative AI. This can include suggestions for how to better integrate the tool's output into their work or how to improve the relevance and accuracy of the tool's output.

Research Tool: Generative AI can be used as a research tool to help students explore different topics and find answers to their questions. Instructors can encourage students to use these tools to research topics related to their coursework or assignments and provide guidance on how to use the tool effectively.

Writing Assistance: Generative AI  serves as a writing assistant to help students generate ideas and improve their writing skills. Instructors can encourage students to use these tools to generate topic ideas, brainstorm content, and get feedback on their writing.

Language Practice: Generative AI as  a language practice tool helps students improve their language skills. Instructors can encourage students to practice their writing or speaking skills by engaging in conversations in the target language.

Interactive Learning: Generative AI can be used as an interactive learning tool to engage students in interactive and personalized learning experiences. Instructors can design interactive learning activities using ChatGPT, such as quizzes, games, or simulations.

Customized Content: Generative AI can be used to create customized content tailored to individual student needs. Instructors can use ChatGPT to generate personalized study materials for students, such as summaries of course content, flashcards, or study guides.

Research Assignment: In this assignment, students are required to use Generative AI to research a topic related to their coursework or assignment. Students will be required to submit a written report on their findings, including a summary of the information they found, the sources they used, and their evaluation of the quality and reliability of the information. Grading criteria could include the quality of the report, the relevance and accuracy of the information found, and the evaluation of the sources used.

Writing Activity: In this activity, students will use Generative AI to generate ideas and improve their writing skills. Students will be given a writing prompt, and they will use ChatGPT to generate ideas and structure their writing. They will then write a draft of their essay, using the ideas and structure provided by ChatGPT. Grading criteria could include the coherence and organization of the essay, the quality of the ideas generated, and the relevance of the content to the writing prompt.

Language Practice: In this activity, students will practice their language skills by engaging in a conversation in the target language. Students will be required to submit a transcript of their conversation, along with a reflection on their language proficiency and areas for improvement. Grading criteria could include the accuracy and fluency of the student's language use, the complexity of the conversation, and the reflection on their language skills.

Interactive Learning: In this activity, students will engage in an interactive learning experience using Generative AI. Students will be given a set of questions related to the course content, and they will use Generative AI to find the answers. They will then submit their answers along with a reflection on their learning experience. Grading criteria could include the accuracy of the answers, the quality of the reflection, and the engagement and participation in the activity.

Customized Content: In this assignment, students will use Generative AI to generate customized study materials tailored to their individual needs. Students will identify areas where they need additional support or clarification, and they will use ChatGPT to generate study materials such as summaries, flashcards, or study guides. They will then use these materials to prepare for an exam or assignment. Grading criteria could include the quality and relevance of the study materials, the effectiveness of the materials in helping the student prepare, and the reflection on their learning experience.

Carvalho, L., Martinez-Maldonado, R., Tsai, Y.-S., Markauskaite, L., & De Laat, M. (2022). How can we design for learning in an AI world? Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 3. 

Chavez, M. R., Butler, T. S., Rekawek, P., Heo, H., & Kinzler, W. L. (2023). ChatGPT (Generative Pre-trained Transformer): Why we should embrace this technology. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology. 

Choi, E. P. H., Lee, J. J., Ho, M-H., Kwok, J. Y. Y., & Lok, K. Y. W. (2023). Chatting or cheating? The impact of ChatGPT and other artificial intelligence language models on nurse education. Nurse Education Today, 125. 

Claude. (n.d.). Getting started with Claude. 

Eke, D. O. (2023). ChatGPT and the rise of Generative AI: Threat to academic integrity? Journal of Responsible Technology, 13. 

 

Google. (n.d.). What can Bard do and other frequently asked questions? Bard is now Gemini.

Iskender, A. (2023). Holy or Unholy? Interview with Open AI’s ChatGPT. European Journal of Tourism Research, 34, 1–11. 

Mollick, E. R., & Mollick, L. (2022). New modes of learning enabled by AI Chatbots: Three methods and assignments (2022). SSRN Electronic Journal. 

OpenAI. (2022, September 2). About OpenAI. OpenAI. Retrieved January 24, 2023.

Pavlik, J. V. (2023). Collaborating with ChatGPT: Considering the implications of Generative Artificial Intelligence for Journalism and Media Education. Journalism & Mass Communication Educator, 78(1), 84–93. 

Perkins, M. (2023). Academic Integrity considerations of AI large language models in the post-pandemic era: ChatGPT and beyond. Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice, 20(2), 1–24. 

Tlili, A., Shehata, B., Adarkwah, M. A., Bozkurt, A., Hickey, D. T., Huang, R., & Agyemang, B. (2023). What if the devil is my guardian angel: ChatGPT as a case study of using chatbots in education. Smart Learning Environments, 10(1), 1–24.