1

Planned Learning Activity: Exploring Generative AI in Higher Education Assessment

Teaching Context

 Subject Area: Educational Technology and Pedagogy

 Course Title: Generative AI in Teaching and Examination in Higher Education

 Estimated Number of Students: 20–30 graduate-level students, including future

educators, instructional designers, and academic staff

 Mode of Delivery: Hybrid (primarily digital, with synchronous virtual sessions and

asynchronous components on a Learning Management System)

This course is designed to equip students with both the theoretical and practical understanding

necessary to integrate generative artificial intelligence (AI) tools such as ChatGPT, Gemini, and

Claude into teaching and assessment practices in higher education. Students explore the

pedagogical implications, ethical challenges, and future directions of AI-mediated learning

environments.

Goals for Teaching

The primary goal of this learning activity is to critically examine how generative AI tools can

support both formative and summative assessment in university-level teaching. Students will

work collaboratively to develop assessment strategies that incorporate generative AI and present

them in a peer-reviewed format. This aligns with Bates’ (2022) argument that AI should not

replace human-centered pedagogy but be used to expand learner engagement and critical skills

by shifting from information transmission to reflective, student-centered learning. Sidorkin

(2024) highlights the role of prompt engineering as a skill that enables learners to interact

purposefully with AI, shaping outputs that foster metacognition and creativity. Together, these
 2

perspectives support positioning AI not as an oracle but as a collaborative partner in the learning

process.

Larger Course Context

Before this Activity: Students are introduced to foundational theories on AI in education,

including algorithmic bias, prompt engineering, and educational design principles.

During this Activity: Students apply this knowledge in a real-world simulation by designing an

AI-assisted assessment activity or tool.

After this Activity: Students present their plans in peer groups, receive feedback, and refine their

proposals for submission as a capstone project. They also complete a reflective journal on the

ethical use of AI in teaching and testing.

Use of Generative AI

In this learning activity, generative AI is used in several ways:

By Students:

Brainstorming different types of AI-supported assessments (e.g., AI-generated quiz items,

automated essay feedback)

Using AI to simulate feedback on a draft assessment plan

Evaluating AI-generated responses to sample student prompts for reliability and fairness

By the Instructor:

Creating example prompts and grading rubrics with the help of AI tools

Designing a self-paced tutorial on prompt engineering and ethical AI use

Providing AI-assisted feedback on student submissions to model formative evaluation

The integration of AI is not merely technical, it is deeply reflective. Students are expected to

challenge the AI output and identify both opportunities and limitations in its use for educational

assessment.

Tool Flexibility and Instructional Scaffolding

Although students are introduced to ChatGPT, Gemini, and Claude, they are free to explore other

types of language models. They may use a wider selection of generative AI tools, provided that

they follow the ethical, functional, and pedagogical guidelines. By being flexible, students can

assess what is available on each tool and pick one that is most useful for their group. The

instructor will also share specific ways AI can help with both formative and summative testing.

Structure and Timeline

Week 1:

Introduction to generative AI tools in education

Readings and discussions on ethical, practical, and pedagogical frameworks

AI tools demonstration session (e.g., using ChatGPT for generating formative questions)

Week 2:

Group formation and project topic selection

Workshop on how to use AI to generate and evaluate assessment items

Start drafting AI-assisted assessments using provided templates

Week 3:

AI feedback simulation: students submit their draft assessments to ChatGPT and reflect on the

AI’s suggestions

Peer review: groups provide critique on each other’s AI-assisted assessments

Instructor check-in and formative feedback

Week 4:

Finalization of AI-assisted assessment project

Class presentations with Q&A sessions

Reflective journals submitted: “What role should AI play in evaluating student learning?”

Potential Difficulties

Relying more on AI-generated content: Students can sometimes just accept what AI offers

without checking if it is accurate or fair.

Some students face difficulties trying to interpret the prompts or get access to the needed

technology.

Problems related to ethics: Someone using AI incorrectly or not respecting student privacy could

occur.

Why This Approach?

Students are guided to collaborate, use critical thinking and iterate in this learning activity. It puts

an emphasis on learning to examine our thinking and explores the effects of AI on academic

honesty, the originality of work and how much value is real. Combining theory with practice

encourages creativity and safety, so future teachers can respond to new developments in

technology.

Risks and Their Management

A major risk is the misuse or uncritical acceptance of AI outputs. As Paul et al. (2023) warn, the

lack of regulation of AI in education is of concern due to the issue of bias, transparency, and

fairness, as seen in the larger policy discussions. Bates (2022) also cautions that Universal access

is threatened unless inequities in access and digital literacy issues are corrected. To keep this

under control they must ask critical questions of AI responses and be aware of the ethical
 5

implications of AI use.

Another risk arises from poorly designed prompts. According to Sidorkin (2024), vague or

unfocused prompts can result in shallow or biased AI outputs, which does not help a learning

goal. Students will overcome this by keeping a record of their iterative revisions to prompts,

demonstrating how wording decisions changed AI responses and enhanced the educational utility

of these responses.

Assessment Criteria

The assessment will focus not only on the final product but also on how students engage with AI

tools. According to Bates (2022), high-quality digital assessment should focus on higher-order

skills like critical thinking and creativity and collaboration. Accordingly, the submissions the

students provide should demonstrate a reflective application of AI as opposed to automation of

activities.

Sidorkin (2024) adds that the prompts encouraging engineering must be regarded as a learning

goal in its own right. students are expected to present the way their prompts changed and how

this changed the ability of AI to facilitate reasoning and feedback. Finally, linking to the policy

perspective of Paul et al. (2023), in their assessment plan, students have to consider ethical

governance and be aware of the implications of AI in the wider field.

References

Bates, A. W. (2022). Teaching in a digital age: Guidelines for designing teaching and learning

(3rd ed., chapter 9.4). Tony Bates Associates Ltd. Retrieved from

[Link]

Liu, B. L., Morales, D., Roser Chinchilla, J. F., Sabzalieva, E., Valentini, A., Vieira do

Nascimento, D., & Yerovi, C. (2023). Harnessing the era of artificial intelligence in

higher education: A primer for higher education stakeholders. UNESCO IESALC.

Retrieved from [Link]

Paul, R., Carmel, E., & Cobbe, J. (Eds.). (2024). Handbook on public policy and artificial

intelligence (Handbooks of Research on Public Policy series). Edward Elgar Publishing.

[Link] ISBN: 978-1-80392-216-4

Sidorkin, A. M. (2024). Embracing chatbots in higher education (Chapter 1: Prompt

Engineering). Routledge.