Institution: University of Limerick

Discipline: Psychology

Author: Tracey Keogh

GenAI tool(s) used: ChatGPT

Situation / Context

GenAI was used as an assessment tool on co-taught modules, biological basis of human behaviour, and biological psychology taught to 2nd-year undergraduate and Master’ students. The total number of students was 141 (111 undergraduate students and 30 in the master’s programme).

This was the first assessment of its kind within the Department of Psychology, and students voted during the first lecture if they wanted to use GenAI as part of their assessment or not. A great deal of discussion was had this first week on GenAI, previous years’ assessments on these modules and the opportunity the students had to inform the department and faculty of the pros/cons of using GenAI as an assessment method.

Task / Goal

I wanted to determine if GenAI could be used ethically and responsibly as a learning and assessment tool. I opted for this method of assessment after a departmental teaching planning meeting, where we discussed our approach to GenAI. No agreement was given, but what was obvious was a degree of apprehension and uncertainty on how to use GenAI ethically.

From this, I designed an assessment entirely dependent on the students’ voting whether or not to use GenAI. This co-creative space for pedagogical design and assessment allowed students to decide on using GenAI as well as when it should be submitted and variations between the two groups, e.g., content included. The aim was that students with the right supports, could use GenAI ethically and responsibly and in doing so, inform staff and faculty members on its utility. This was a great opportunity for staff and students to learn together in real time.

Actions / Implementation

During the first lecture where the vote took place, time was given to discuss concerns students may have had. It was explained that this was not an assessment to catch anyone out, but an opportunity to inform staff on how GenAI could be used responsibly.

Students were allocated to groups during week two and given a specific nervous system disorder. The brief included that they work in groups using ChatGPT, they decided as a group how much prompt was to be inputted on the groups nervous system disorder. This part of the assessment was not graded and uncontested. From this group meeting, each student then decided if they would use this generated report to help form their approach to writing their own individual report. If they chose to use the GenAI report as a springboard to their own report, it needed to be explicitly stated in the relevant parts of their own report, and the group ChatGPT report had to be included in the appendices. One lecture included a presentation from our technical support officer on how GenAI could be used ethically and another covered writing skills and plagiarism. Weekly support was provided in lectures, during office hours, and online. 

Outcomes

Part of the graded report included a critical reflection. This gave students the opportunity to discuss pros/cons from their own perspective. I reached out to members of staff to see if they had any questions, they wanted to ask the students about their experience.

The composed list was posted on the VLE, informing students they were welcome to provide feedback online, by email or in the final lecture. Students addressed staff questions during the final lecture and responses were noted to feedback to the department. Feedback was encouraged and provided through several means of communication: discussions in lectures, emails, the VLE and the Centre for Transformative Learning module evaluation form, as well as feedback from external examiners.

Student opinions on efficacy varied; some said it made them better researchers, and some noted how flawed the generated content was. Student accountability and engagement were high throughout and evident in the critical reflections.

Reflections

I learned inviting students into a co-creative space on pedagogical design and assessment increased engagement and accountability for work submitted. I also learned that GenAI can be used ethically and responsibly. Through thorough and detailed communication, creativity was fostered, and students had the opportunity to learn about GenAI while also teaching staff about this particular assessment tool which was equally important.

Surprisingly, much of the feedback from students centred on “time”, in terms of both benefits and barriers. For some, it bridged the gap between the initial brief and the dreaded blank page, for others, it provided rabbit holes of research due to inconsistencies in the generated content. Feedback was varied and extremely interesting and a valuable asset to determining the utility of GenAI in education as an assessment tool. I didn’t expect a high level of accountability, and I would include staff support from the library on future assessments.

Author Biography

Dr Tracey Keogh is an Associate Teacher in the Department of Psychology at the University of Limerick. I teach biological, clinical, cognitive, research-based, and introductory modules and supervise research projects at undergraduate and postgraduate levels. Her teaching interests involve extending traditional approaches to teaching, learning and assessment, with the inclusion of innovative and interactive methods such as GenAI and game-based learning. Her research interests include understanding the impact of stress on mental and physical well-being; investigating interactions between trauma, addiction processes, and stress-related factors; and assessing student engagement with different teaching, learning and assessment tools, comparing traditional and interactive models which would be beneficial to future curricula and content creation and delivery.