Örebro University’s guiding principles for AI in education
Örebro University’s guiding principles for AI in education are based on the EU AI Act, the OECD framework for AI literacy, the white paper “Adopting AI that serves the needs and values of universities” published by the European University Association (EUA), Sweden’s national AI strategy, the national recommendations from the Association of Swedish Higher Education Institutions (SUHF) on the use of AI in higher education institutions, as well as Örebro University’s vision, educational philosophy, and AI policy.
Elin Vimefall, Pro-Vice-Chancellor Education, in a convesation with Kristin Ewins, Director of Centre for Academic Development, about Örebro University's guiding principles for AI in education.
The guiding principles are aimed at teachers and educational leaders and have been developed through a collegial process led by the Centre for Academic Development. Teachers, leaders, and students have critically reviewed the guiding principles and contributed constructive proposals in several iterations before endorsement by the Strategic Advisory Board for Education.
AI competence is a fundamental ability that all teachers should have
Teachers need to understand how AI works, be aware of its limitations, and know how AI tools can be used in practice. AI competence also entails the ability to critically examine and evaluate outputs from different AI tools and to take ethical aspects into consideration. The university is responsible for ensuring that teachers are given the opportunity and conditions to develop AI competence, and for following up that this professional development is carried out.
All students should be given opportunities for responsible use of AI
As a future-oriented competence, the university has a responsibility to enable students to develop the ability to understand, use, and engage responsibly with AI. This also gives all students equitable conditions for participating in and progressing through their education.
Our study programmes should ensure that students develop AI-related competences for a future labour market and sustainable societal development
This means that students should be given the opportunity to develop, and be assessed on, the knowledge, understanding, and abilities required by professions today and in the future. These competences include critical judgement, which enables students to be well equipped and capable of influencing future professional life and society in a responsible and independent way.
Students should be given clear guidance on the use of AI in teaching and examination
Guidance should clarify when and how the use of AI is pedagogically motivated and appropriate in relation to the course objectives. It should also specify whether and how such use is to be declared. At the same time, the university needs to create a culture in which students can ask questions and openly discuss the use of AI.
Education and teaching should be designed on the assumption that AI exists and is used
AI does not fundamentally change the core values of academia, such as independence, academic integrity, critical thinking, analytical ability, creativity, and judgement. It does, however, bring renewed urgency to the need to reconsider what these abilities mean and how they can be developed over time.
Examinations should be designed so that students’ own understanding, skills, and judgement are made visible, also when AI can be used
This means, among other things, that material produced by students in an open environment cannot, on its own, form the basis for assessing whether they have the knowledge, understanding, and abilities specified in the course objectives. Examinations that safeguard independence help prevent the risks of over-reliance on AI and of reduced autonomy.
Teachers are encouraged to use AI responsibly to support teaching and examination
AI can strengthen and complement human agency. Many aspects remain unexplored, but in interaction with AI there is potential to develop teaching and examination. AI should never replace professional judgement. Teachers are always responsible for content and design and should take as their starting point a human-centred approach in which transparency, responsibility, and the protection of individual rights are guiding principles.
AI should be used with thoughtfulness and moderation in order to counteract uncritical use driven by a one-sided focus on time efficiency and productivity. The use of AI should be guided by human and academic values and assessed in relation to the university’s core mission, environmental impact, and the risks of global inequalities and widening digital divides.