Marije Schneider on AI Working Group: 'We aim to act quickly and decisively'
Since the end of May, the faculty AI working group has set to work under Marije Schneider’s guidance. Drawing on recommendations from the university’s working group AI in Education (AIED), the team is eager to make headway on actual applications in our teaching, research and organisational practices.
We spoke to Marije Schneider about the AI working group’s goals, strategy and ambitions.
What motivated you to lead this working group?
‘I’m doing the LDE Academic Leadership course and have visited universities in Madrid with other participants. We saw what’s been achieved with AI there, even using limited resources. At one university, they’d created and duplicated avatars of professors so that they could have a discussion with each other! That was a revelation for me. Talking about it on the journey back, we all agreed: we’ve got to act now.'
How is the working group set up?
‘Motivated by the urgency to bundle and coordinate our expertise in AI, we’ve set up a faculty AI working group with 21 members coming from all institutes and staff departments. The faculty working group is divided into a core team and three groups dedicated to a specific theme. Tycho de Graaf is the lead for the working group on Teaching, Jan-Jaap Oerlemans for Research, and Jeroen Leijen for Organisation. Together with myself, Thomas van Beek and Ine Houweling, these three group chairs form the core team that meets once a month. The three working groups meet separately and also come together for a joint meeting once a month.’
What does each working group do exactly?
‘The working group on Teaching is the largest and focuses on guidelines for using AI in lectures and assessments. The Research group focuses on the ethical use of AI and support for, among others, PhD candidates, using tools, as well as research on AI itself. The Organisation group is working on establishing an interactive faculty community to share expertise on AI (e.g. in Teams LTC giving practical examples of AI), reducing the workload of staff through the use of AI tools, as well as a training plan for staff and for sharing knowledge.’
What’s the AI working group’s goal in the short term?
‘We aim to present tangible results this semester. When it comes to teaching, for instance, this could be guidance for teaching staff on how AI can be used for assignments, and to what extent it may be used. This can then still be adjusted for the courses taught in the second semester. In other words, we aim to act quickly and decisively.’
What could such tools be?
‘Drawing on the draft report from the AIED, the faculty working group on Teaching is looking at the AI assessment scale, which provides levels for the extent to which AI can be used in teaching. The levels range, for example, from 'do not use AI’, to ‘only use AI for assistance and spellchecking in texts', and ‘use AI with critical reflection’.
This would provide teachers with better guidance. There are also students who often request more clarity: e.g. how much can I learn with the help of AI, am I still learning enough skills myself, what about privacy and security, and what is the effect of AI on the climate?'
What do you see as the greatest opportunities for AI at our faculty?
There’s huge potential, but we need to approach it with care. To what extent is AI being used in the judiciary, in legal professions, or public and corporate sectors? If these sectors have adopted it, but we’re not preparing our students for it, then we’ll be coming up short. That’s why a survey is currently being prepared for the professional field about AI in practice and what is expected of our graduates.’
How do you know about how our faculty works with AI?
‘A survey has been sent to all staff asking questions such as: what AI tools are you using in your work? Do you use a paid or free version? How often do you use the tools and with which account? etc. The questionnaire will be processed anonymously and we’re hoping that as many colleagues as possible will complete it so that we can take appropriate action.'
Do you also work with other faculties or the university?
The university has an AI in Education programme manager, Ella Akin, who came along to introduce herself recently at the meeting of the faculty working group. She wants to establish a better infrastructure for AI in teaching at the university so the separate faculties don’t have to reinvent the wheel themselves. We’d also like to get involved in projects at other faculties, such as FGGA’s Fair Educational Assessment in the Age of AI (FAIR-ASSESS) project. That’s about building an AI-bot that provides master’s theses with feedback in the same way; so fairly and with less bias. Potentially, this could greatly reduce the workload of teaching staff.’
How will you safeguard the results of the working group in the long term?
‘Together with the Faculty Board, we’re working on incorporating this structurally within policy. Ideally, there’ll be a university team with a mandate and resources to take everything further and safeguard it. As soon as policy, support and knowledge sharing are structural, we can let go. We’re all doing this work on the side and it takes quite a lot of time. I’m proud of everyone who’s been working so hard on this.’
More information?
Read all about AI and the faculty AI working group as well as the latest updates on the LTC-HUB.