Integrating AI and Student Partners in Course Design: A Dual-Support Approach in Faculty Development
Keywords:
faculty development; course design; AI; students as partners; student-centered; teaching practicesAbstract
In a reimagined Course Design Academy, generative AI tools and student partners were integrated as complementary supports for student-centered course design. This design case describes how technological scaffolding (AI) and relational grounding (student partners) supported reflective course planning within a faculty development program. Participants engaged in collaborative processes to develop learning outcomes, teaching practices, and assessment strategies aligned with their instructional values. AI supported drafting and idea generation, while student partners contributed insights grounded in their academic experiences. This approach illustrates how combining technological tools with human dialogue can strengthen faculty development and support more intentional, student-centered course design.
Downloads
References
Anthropic. (2025). Claude (v3.5) [Large language model]. https://claude.ai/
Baker, R. S., & Hawn, A. (2022). Algorithmic bias in education. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 32(4), 1052–1092. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-021-00285-9
Bovill, C. (2020). Co-creation in learning and teaching: The case for a whole-class approach in higher education. Higher Education, 79, 1023–1037. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-019-00453-w
Bovill, C., Cook-Sather, A., & Felten, P. (2011). Students as co-creators of teaching approaches, course design, and curricula: Implications for academic developers. International Journal for Academic Development, 16(2), 133–145. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360144X.2011.568690
Bovill, C., Cook-Sather, A., Felten, P., et al. (2016). Addressing potential challenges in co-creating learning and teaching: Overcoming resistance, navigating institutional norms and ensuring inclusivity in student–staff partnerships. Higher Education, 71, 195–208. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-015-9896-4
Bovill, C., & Woolmer, C. (2019). How conceptualisations of curriculum in higher education influence student-staff co-creation in and of the curriculum. Higher Education, 78, 407–422. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-018-0349-8
Cabral, A., Fuller, S., De Wilde, J., Khama, K., & Melsen, M. (2023). Curriculum enhancement through co-creation: Fostering student-educator partnerships in higher education. International Journal for Students as Partners, 7(2), 111–123. https://doi.org/10.15173/ijsap.v7i2.5280
Cai, L., Msafiri, M. M., & Kangwa, D. (2025). Exploring the impact of integrating AI tools in higher education using the Zone of Proximal Development. Education and Information Technologies, 30, 7191–7264. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-13112-0
Campbell, R., & Blankenship, B. (2021). Implementation plans for course redesigns: An exploration of identified strategies. To Improve the Academy: A Journal of Educational Development, 40(2), 234–268. https://doi.org/10.3998/tia.137
Castillo-Martínez, I. M., Flores-Bueno, D., Gómez-Puente, S. M., & Vite-León, V. O. (2024). AI in higher education: A systematic literature review. Frontiers in Education, 9, Article 1391485. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2024.1391485
Chism, N. V. N., Holley, M., & Harris, C. J. (2012). Researching the impact of educational development: Basis for informed practice. To Improve the Academy: A Journal of Educational Development, 31(1), 129–145. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2334-4822.2012.tb00678.x
Cook-Sather, A., Bovill, C., & Felten, P. (2014). Engaging students as partners in learning and teaching: A guide for faculty. Jossey-Bass.
Crain, C., Ewing, A., Billy, I., & Campbell, H. A. (2025). The advantages and disadvantages of AI in higher education. Proceedings of the Centre for Business & Economic Research, 1–15. https://cberuk.com/cdn/conference_proceedings/2025-01-13-22-04-50-PM.pdf
Crompton, H., & Burke, D. (2023). Artificial intelligence in higher education: The state of the field. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 20(1), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-023-00392-8
Fink, L. D. (2013). Creating significant learning experiences. John Wiley & Sons.
Gealone, D. (2024). Exploring faculty perceptions of AI integration in pedagogical practices at higher education institutions: A qualitative study. International Journal of Arts, Sciences and Education, 5(1), 140–147. https://ijase.org/index.php/ijase/article/view/396
Geurts, E. M. A., Reijs, R. P., Leenders, H. H. M., Jansen, M. W. J., & Hoebe, C. J. P. A. (2024). Co-creation and decision-making with students about teaching and learning: A systematic literature review. Journal of Educational Change, 25, 103–125. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10833-023-09481-x
Google DeepMind. (2025). Gemini (v1.5) [Multimodal large language model]. https://gemini.google.com/
Gravett, E. O., & Broscheid, A. (2018). Models and genres of faculty development. In B. Berkey, C. Meixner, P. M. Green, & E. A. Eddins (Eds.), Reconceptualizing faculty development in service-learning/community engagement: Exploring intersections, frameworks, and models of practice (pp. 85–106). Stylus Publishing.
Grovergrys, K., & Rettler-Pagel, T. (2025, February 27). Empowering faculty to lead AI decision-making. Community College Daily. https://www.ccdaily.com/2025/02/empowering-faculty-to-lead-ai-decision-making/
Healey, M., Flint, A., & Harrington, K. (2014). Engagement through partnership: Students as partners in learning & Teaching in Higher Education. York, UK: Higher Education Academy.
HeyGen. (2025). AI video generator [Software]. https://www.heygen.com/
Holmes, W., Porayska-Pomsta, K., Holstein, K., Sutherland, E., Baker, T., Buckingham Shum, S., Santos, O. C., Rodrigo, M. T., Cukurova, M., Bittencourt, I. I., & Koedinger, K. R. (2022). Ethics of AI in education: Towards a community-wide framework. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 32, 504–526. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-021-00239-1
InVideo. (2025). AI video creation platform [Software]. https://invideo.io/
Klang, M., & Suter, M. M. (2017). Learning Design: Create Amazing Learning Experiences. Independently published.
Lumen5. (2025). AI video creation platform [Software]. https://www.lumen5.com/
Luo, J., Zheng, C., Yin, J., & Teo, H. H. (2025). Design and assessment of AI-based learning tools in higher education: A systematic review. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 22(1), Article 42. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-025-00540-2
Mah, D.-K., & Groß, N. (2024). Artificial intelligence in higher education: Exploring faculty use, self-efficacy, distinct profiles, and professional development needs. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 21(1), Article 58. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-024-00490-1
Mah, D.-K., Knoth, N., & Egloffstein, M. (2025). Perspectives of academic staff on artificial intelligence in higher education: Exploring areas of relevance. Frontiers in Education, 10, Article 1484904. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2025.1484904
McDermott, B., & Anselmo, L. (2024). Academic Integrity Reflection Tool. Taylor Institute for Teaching and Learning, University of Calgary. https://taylorinstitute.ucalgary.ca/resources/Academic-Integrity-Reflection-Tool
Mercer-Mapstone, L., Dvorakova, S. L., Matthews, K. E., Abbot, S., Cheng, B., Felten, P., Knorr, K., Marquis, E., Shammas, R., & Swaim, K. (2017). A systematic literature review of students as partners in higher education. https://doi.org/10.15173/ijsap.v1i1.3119
Microsoft. (2025). Copilot (GPT-4) [Large Language Model]. https://www.microsoft.com/copilot
Nguyen, K. V. (2025). The use of generative AI tools in higher education: Ethical and pedagogical principles. Journal of Academic Ethics. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10805-025-09607-1
Ofosu-Ampong, K. (2024). Beyond the hype: Exploring faculty perceptions and acceptability of AI in teaching practices. Discover Education, 3(1), Article 38. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44217-024-00128-4
OpenAI. (2025). ChatGPT (May version) [Large language model]. https://chat.openai.com/chat
Padlet. (2025). Padlet [Digital collaboration platform]. https://padlet.com/
Perplexity AI. (2025). Perplexity (Academic Mode) [AI-powered research assistant]. https://www.perplexity.ai/
Puentedura, R. R. (2006, November 28). Transformation, technology, and education in the state of Maine [Web log post]. https://www.hippasus.com/rrpweblog/archives/2006_11.html
Puentedura, R. R. (2013, May 29). SAMR: Moving from enhancement to transformation [Web log post]. https://www.hippasus.com/rrpweblog/archives/2013_05.html
Rose, D. H., & Meyer, A. (2002). Teaching every student in the digital age: Universal design for learning. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Slimi, Z. (2023). The impact of artificial intelligence on higher education: An empirical study. European Journal of Educational Sciences, 10(1), 267–284. http://dx.doi.org/10.19044/ejes.v10no1a17
Troisi, J.D., Palmer, M.S., Wright, M.C., Hostetler, L.A., & Hurney, C.A. (2025). Developing High-Impact Course Design Institutes: A Model for Change (1st ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003448358
Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (1998). Understanding by design. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Winkelmes, M. (2013). Transparency in teaching: Faculty share data and improve students’ learning. Liberal Education, 99(2). Association of American Colleges and Universities.
Zehnder, C., Alby, C., Kleine, K., & Metzker, J. (2021). Learning that matters: A field guide to course design for transformative education. Myers Education Press.
Zhang, X., Zhang, P., Shen, Y., Liu, M., Wang, Q., Gašević, D., & Fan, Y. (2024). A systematic literature review of empirical research on applying generative artificial intelligence in education. Frontiers of Digital Education, 1, 223–245. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44366-024-0028-5
Downloads
Published
Data Availability Statement
The data in this descriptive manuscript, including anonymized participant feedback and course design artifacts, are not publicly available due to institutional privacy policies and participant confidentiality. However, de-identified excerpts and representative examples are included within the manuscript.
License
Access Agreement Journal on Excellence in College Teaching
Before proceeding you must agree to the terms and conditions of usage as outlined below by clicking on the Accept button and/or by both parties’ signatures below. You will have to do this only once. After agreement, you will be redirected back to the main Journal page. A pdf copy of the terms is available for download.
This Access Agreement (the "Agreement") is effective upon processing of payment ("Effective Date") and is entered into by and between the Journal on Excellence in College Teaching (“JECT”) and the Customer (“Customer").
This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement and supersedes and voids all prior communications, understandings, and agreements relating to the Product(s), including any terms of use displayed to Authorized Users via the online site of the Product(s). Alterations to the Agreement and to any Addendum to the Agreement are only valid and binding if they are recorded in writing and signed by both parties
. I. Definitions
"Authorized Users" shall mean individuals who are authorized by the Customer (which shall include those individuals authorized by the Institutions hereunder) to access the Customer's information services whether on-site or off-site via secure authentication and who are affiliated with the Customer as a student (undergraduates and postgraduates), employee (whether on a permanent or temporary basis), or a contractor of the Customer. Individuals who are not a current student, employee, or a contractor of the Customer, but who are permitted to access the Customer's information services from computer terminals within the physical premises of the Customer ("Walk-In Users"), are also deemed to be Authorized Users, but only for the time they are within the physical premises of the Customer. Walk-In Users may not be given means to access the Product(s) when they are not within the physical premises of the Customer.
"Commercial Use" shall mean use for the purpose of monetary reward (whether by or for the Customer or an Authorized User) by means of the sale, resale, loan, transfer, hire, or other form of exploitation of the Product(s). For the avoidance of doubt, neither recovery of direct cost by the Customer from Authorized Users, nor use by the Customer or Authorized Users of the Product(s) in the course of research funded by a commercial organization, shall be deemed to constitute Commercial Use.
"Educational Purposes" shall mean for the purpose of education, teaching, distance learning, private study and/or research as described in Section II below.
"Institutions" shall mean the Customer's participating institutions, if applicable.
"License" shall mean the non-exclusive, non-transferable right to access and use the Product(s) pursuant to the specific terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement.
"Product(s)" shall mean the products, materials and/or information contained therein that are subject to this Agreement. Product(s) include the Journal on Excellence in College Teaching and the archive of the Learning Communities Journal.
"Reasonable Amount" shall be determined based on guidelines set forth by 17 U.S. Code § 107 (Limitations on exclusive rights, Fair use).
"Secure Authentication" shall mean access to the Product(s) by Internet Protocol ("IP") ranges or by another means of authentication agreed between the Publisher and Customer or Institutions (if applicable) from time to time.
II. Authorized Use of Product(s)
Customer, the Institutions (if applicable), and Authorized Users may use the Product(s) for Educational Purposes as follows:
Analysis. Authorized Users shall be permitted to extract or use information contained in the Product(s) for Educational Purposes, including, but not limited to, text and data mining, extraction and manipulation of information for the purposes of illustration, explanation, example, comment, criticism, teaching, research, or analysis.
Course Packs. Customer, the Institutions, and Authorized Users may use a Reasonable Amount of the Product(s) in the preparation of course packs or other educational materials.
Digital Copy. Customer, the Institutions, and Authorized Users may download and digitally copy a Reasonable Amount of the Product(s).
Display. Customer, the Institutions, and Authorized Users shall have the right to electronically display the Product(s) to the extent necessary to further the intent and purpose of this Agreement.
Electronic Reserve. Customer, the Institutions, and Authorized Users may use a Reasonable Amount of each of the Product(s) in connection with specific courses of instruction offered by Customer.
Interlibrary Loan. The Customer and the Institutions shall be permitted to use Reasonable Amounts of the Content to fulfill occasional requests from other, non-participating institutions, a practice commonly called Interlibrary Loan ("ILL"). Customer and the Institutions shall fulfill such requests in compliance with Section 108 of the United States Copyright Law (17 USC S108, "Limitations on exclusive rights: Reproduction by libraries and archives") and the Guidelines for the Proviso of Subsection 108(2g)(2) prepared by the National Commission on New Technological Uses of Copyrighted Works (CONTU).
The electronic form of the Product(s) may be used as a source for ILL. Customer and the Institutions shall include copyright notices on all ILL transmissions. Notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary, in no event shall any non-secure electronic transmission of files be permitted.
Print Copy. Customer, the Institutions, and Authorized Users may print a Reasonable Amount of the Product(s).
Recover Copying Costs. Customer and the Institutions may charge a reasonable fee to cover costs of copying or printing portions of Product(s) for Authorized Users.
Scholarly Sharing. Authorized Users may transmit to a third party colleague in hard copy or electronically, Reasonable Amounts of the Product(s) for personal use, professional use, or Educational Purposes but in no event for Commercial Use. In addition, Authorized Users have the right to use, with appropriate credit, figures, tables, and brief excerpts from the Product(s) in the Authorized User's own scientific, scholarly, and educational works.
Text Mining. Authorized Users may use the licensed material to perform and engage in text mining/data mining activities for legitimate academic research and other Educational Purposes. Those uses beyond educational use shall require permission from the Publisher.
III. Restrictions
Except as provided herein, the institution shall make reasonable efforts to inform its authorized users not to use, alter, decompile, modify, display, or distribute the Product(s) as follows:
Alter Identification. Remove, obscure, or modify copyright notices, text acknowledging, attributions, or other means of identification or disclaimers as they appear. Alter Product(s).
Alter, decompile, adapt, or modify the Product(s), except to the extent necessary to make it perceptible on a computer screen, or as otherwise permitted in this Agreement. Alteration of words or their order is strictly prohibited.
Commercial Use. No Commercial Use of the Product(s) shall be permitted unless the Customer or an Authorized User has been granted prior written consent by an authorized representative of the Product(s). Use of all or any part of the Product(s) for any Commercial Use or for any purpose other than Educational Purposes.
Distribution. Display or distribute any part of the Product(s) on any electronic network, including without limitation, the Internet, and any other distribution medium now in existence or hereinafter created, other than by a Secure Authentication; print and distribute any portion(s) of the Product(s)s to persons or entities other than the Customer or Authorized Users, except as provided in Section II.
JECT acknowledges that the Customer cannot police or control the actions of its students, faculty, and other Authorized Users with respect to their use of the Product(s). In the event of abuse, the institution shall make prompt and reasonable efforts to heal the breach and notify the publisher.
IV. Term and Termination
This agreement shall commence on the Effective Date and shall remain in effect unless and until terminated as permitted herein (the "Term"). There is no perpetual electronic access to content made available during the term of the agreement.
JECT may terminate this Agreement if Customer violates any of the terms and conditions set forth herein. In the event of any termination of access, JECT will promptly notify the Customer of the basis for termination.
The Customer may terminate this Agreement if sufficient funds are not provided or allotted in future government-approved budgets of the Customer (or reasonably available or expected to become available from other sources at the time the Customer’s payment obligation attaches) to permit the Subscriber, in the exercise of its reasonable administrative discretion, to continue this Agreement.
In the event of any unauthorized use of the Product(s) by an Authorized User, Customer shall cooperate with JECT in the investigation of any unauthorized use of the Product(s) of which it is made aware and shall use reasonable efforts to remedy such unauthorized use and prevent its recurrence. JECT may terminate such Authorized User's access to the Product(s) after first providing reasonable notice to the Customer (in no event less than two (2) weeks) and cooperating with the Customer to avoid recurrence of any unauthorized use. In the event of any termination of access, JECT will promptly notify the Customer
. V. Refunds
In the event that a subscription is canceled by the Customer prior to the subscription end date, the following will be used as guidelines for refunds.
Electronic subscriptions. The Customer shall be entitled to a full refund within 14 days of the start of the most recent subscription term. Refunds requested after 14 days but no later than 60 days from the start of the most recent subscription term will be allowed, minus a 30% processing fee. Refunds will not be granted if requested more than 60 days after the start of the most recent subscription term.
