If Ferris Bueller Had a Bot

AI Meeting Assistant Policy Landscape of CPED Member Institutions

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5195/ie.2025.471

Keywords:

AI, AI meeting assistants, AI policy, higher education, higher education policy

Abstract

Artificial Intelligence (AI) has seen a significant rise in public use since the release of ChatGPT in November of 2022. Higher education institutions (HEI) have struggled to negotiate how best to manage AI technologies within their academic communities, acknowledging both positive and negative impacts of AI on education. Focused primarily on large language model (LLM) technologies, such as ChatGPT, HEIs are working to build policies and guidelines to regulate their use. However, within these policies, few HEIs have considered AI meeting assistants, even though these applications bring their own set of benefits and risks. This article examines the public websites of 135 CPED universities, eight of which mention AI meeting assistants in their policies. The article analyzes the risks, benefits, and use guidance provided by these policies and suggests next steps for HEIs to address the ethical, legal, and pedagogical implications of AI meeting assistants.

References

Akgun, S., & Greenhow, C. (2022). Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings. AI and Ethics, 2, 431–440. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43681-021-00096-7

American Council on Education. (n.d.). Carnegie classification of institutions of higher education. https://carnegieclassifications.acenet.edu/

Anft, M. (2023). Perspectives on generative AI: College leaders assess the promise and the threat of a game-changing tool. The Chronicle of Higher Education. https://connect.chronicle.com/rs/931□EKA□218/images/PerspectivesGenerativeAI_ResearchBrief.pdf?version=1

Baidoo-Anu, D., & Ansah, L. O. (2023). Education in the era of generative artificial intelligence (AI): Understanding the potential benefits of ChatGPT in promoting teaching and learning. Journal of AI, 7(1), 52–62. https://doi.org/10.61969/jai.1337500

Ballenger, S. (2022). Access for Deaf and hard of hearing individuals in informational and educational remote sessions. Assistive Technology Outcomes and Benefits, 16(2), 45–55.

Bearman, M., Ryan, J., Ajjawi, R. (2023). Discourses of artificial intelligence in higher education: A critical literature review. Higher Education, 86, 369–385. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-022-00937-2

Berry, P. M., Gervasio, M., Peintner, B., & Yorke-Smith, N. (2011). PTIME: Personalized assistance for calendaring. ACM Transactions on Intelligent Systems and Technology, 2(4), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1145/1989734.1989744

Canhoto, A. I., & Clear, F. (2020). Artificial intelligence and machine learning as business tools: A framework for diagnosing value destruction potential. Business Horizons, 63(2), 183–193. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2019.11.003

Chan, C. K. Y. (2023) A comprehensive AI policy education framework for university teaching and learning. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 20, Article 38. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-023-00408-3

D’Agostino, S. (2023, March 22). GPT-4 is here. But most faculty lack AI policies. Inside Higher Ed. https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2023/03/22/gpt-4-here-most-faculty-lack-ai-policies

Davis, V. (2023, May 11). Welcome to the wild, wild West of AI and the higher education institution. WCET Frontiers. https://wcet.wiche.edu/frontiers/2023/05/11/welcome-to-the-wild-wild-west-of-ai-and-the-higher-education-institution/

de Barcelos Silva, A., Gomes, M. M., da Costa, C. A., da Rosa Righi, R., Barbosa, J. L. V., Pessin, G., De Doncker, G., & Federizzi, G. (2020). Intelligent personal assistants: A systematic literature review. Expert Systems with Applications, 147, Article 113193. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2020.113193

Dempere, J., Modugu, K., Hesham, A., & Ramasamy, L. K. (2023). The impact of ChatGPT on higher education. Frontiers in Education, 8. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2023.1206936

Doroudi, S. (2022). The intertwined histories of artificial intelligence and education. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 33(4), 885–928. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-022-00313-2

Dwivedi, Y. K., Kshetri, N., Hughes, L., Slade, E. L., Jeyaraj, A., Kar, A. K., Baabdullah, A. M., Koohang, A., Raghavan, V., Ahuja, M., Albanna, H., Albashrawi, M. A., Al-Busaidi, A. S., Balakrishnan, J., Barlette, Y., Basu, S., Bose, I., Brooks, L., Buhalis, D., Carter, L… Wright, R. (2023). “So what if ChatGPT wrote it?” Multidisciplinary perspectives on opportunities, challenges and implications of generative conversational AI for research, practice and policy. International Journal of Information Management, 71, Article 102642. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2023.102642

Eaton, S. E. (2023). Postplagiarism: Transdisciplinary ethics and integrity in the age of artificial intelligence and neurotechnology. International Journal for Educational Integrity, 19(23), Article 23. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40979-023-00144-1

Elo, S., & Kyngäs, H. (2008). The qualitative content analysis process. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 62(1), 107–115. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2007.04569.x

Floridi, L., & Cowls, J. (2019). A unified framework of five principles for AI in society. Harvard Data Science Review, 1.1. https://doi.org/10.1162/99608f92.8cd550d1

Hsieh, H.-F., Shannon, S. E. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 15(9),1277–1288. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732305276687

Hughes, J. (Director). (1986). Ferris Bueller’s day off [Film]. Paramount Pictures.

Järvi, H., Kähkönen, A.-K., & Torvinen, H. (2018). When value co-creation fails: Reasons that lead to value co-destruction. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 34(1), 63–77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scaman.2018.01.002

Kimani, E., Rowan, K., McDuff, D., Czerwinski, M., & Mark, G. (2019). A conversational agent in support of productivity and wellbeing at work. 2019 8th International Conference on Affective Computing and Intelligent Interaction (ACII), 332–338. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACII.2019.8925488

Krafft, P. M., Young, M., Katell, M., Huang, K., Bugingo, G. (2020, February 7–8). Defining AI in policy versus practice [Conference presentation]. AIES 2020: AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, New York, NY, United States. https://doi.org/10.1145/3375627.3375835

Kramm, N., & McKenna, S. (2023). AI amplifies the tough question: What is higher education really for? Teaching in Higher Education, 28(8), 2173–2178. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2023.2263839

Krippendorff, K. (2019). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.

Maedche, A., Legner, C., Benlian, A., Berger, B., Gimpel, H., Hess, T., Hinz, O., Morana, S., & Söllner, M. (2019). AI-based digital assistants: Opportunities, threats, and research perspectives. Business and Information Systems Engineering, 61(4), 535–544. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12599-019-00600-8

McCorduck, P. (2004). Machines who think. CRC Press.

Myers, K., Berry, P., Blythe, J., Conley, K., Gervasio, M., McGuinness, D. L., Morley, D., Pfeffer, A., Pollack, M., & Tambe, M. (2007). An intelligent personal assistant for task and time management. AI Magazine, 28(2), 47–61. https://doi.org/10.1609/aimag.v28i2.2039

Otter.ai. (2020, July 22). Otter for education transforms remote learning [Press release]. https://otter.ai/blog/otter-for-education-transforms-remote-learning-2

Primary Research Group. (2023). Survey of US higher education faculty 2023, views on and use of ChatGPT [Report]. https://www.primaryresearch.com/AddCart.aspx?ReportID=757

Saldaña, J. (2021). The coding manual for qualitative researchers (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.

Schmidt, R., Alt, R., & Zimmermann, A. (2023). Assistant platforms. Electronic Markets, 33, Article 59. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12525-023-00671-2

Schön, E.-M., Neumann, M., Holfmann-Stoölting, C., Baeza-Yates, R., & Rauschenberger, M. (2023). How are AI assistants changing higher education? Frontiers in Computer Science, 5. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomp.2023.1208550

Shaikh, S. J. (2023). Artificially intelligent, interactive, and assistive machines: A definitional framework for intelligent assistants. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 39(4), 776–789. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2022.2049133

Stanley, J., ten Brink, R., Valiton, A., Bostic, T., & Scollan, R. (2022). Chatbot accessibility guidance: A review and way forward. Proceedings of Sixth International Congress on Information and Communication Technology, ICICT 2021, London (Vol. 3), 919–942. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-1781-2_91

UNESCO. (2023, June 1). UNESCO survey: Less than 10% of schools and universities have formal guidance on AI. https://www.unesco.org/en/articles/unesco-survey-less-10-schools-and-universities-have-formal-guidance-ai

Vears, D. F., & Gillam, L. (2022). Inductive content analysis: A guide for beginning qualitative researchers. Focus on Health Professional Education, 23(1), 111–127. https://doi.org/10.11157/fohpe.v23i1.544

Wood, P. (2023, February 28). Oxford and Cambridge ban ChatGPT over plagiarism fears but other universities choose to embrace AI bot. inews.co.uk. https://inews.co.uk/news/oxford-cambridge-ban-chatgpt-plagiarism-universities-2178391

Woodall, T., Hiller, A., & Resnick, S. (2014). Making sense of higher education: Students as consumers and the value of the university experience. Studies in Higher Education, 39(1), 48–67. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2011.648373

Yasin, D. D. E. (2023, March 22). AI policy advice for administrators and faculty (opinion). Inside Higher Ed. https://www.insidehighered.com/views/2023/03/22/ai-policy-advice-administrators-and-faculty-opinion

Yau, C., & Chan, K. (2023, February 17). University of Hong Kong temporarily bans students from using ChatGPT, other AI-based tools in coursework. South China Morning Post. https://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/education/article/3210650/university-hong-kong-temporarily-bans-students-using-chatgpt-other-ai-based-tools-coursework

Zeithaml, V. A. (1998). Consumer perceptions of price, quality, and value: A means-end model and synthesis of evidence. Journal of Marketing, 52(3), 2–22. https://doi.org/10.2307/1251446

Downloads

Published

2025-02-07

How to Cite

Azevedo, P. C. R., & Valadez, C. B. (2025). If Ferris Bueller Had a Bot: AI Meeting Assistant Policy Landscape of CPED Member Institutions . Impacting Education: Journal on Transforming Professional Practice, 10(1), 80–89. https://doi.org/10.5195/ie.2025.471

Issue

Vol. 10 No. 1 (2025): The Role of Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Doctoral Research and Writing

Section

Themed-The Role of Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Doctoral Research and Writing

License

Copyright (c) 2025 Paula Cristina R. Azevedo, Christine B. Valadez

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

  1. The Author retains copyright in the Work, where the term “Work” shall include all digital objects that may result in subsequent electronic publication or distribution.
  2. Upon acceptance of the Work, the author shall grant to the Publisher the right of first publication of the Work.
  3. The Author shall grant to the Publisher and its agents the nonexclusive perpetual right and license to publish, archive, and make accessible the Work in whole or in part in all forms of media now or hereafter known under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License or its equivalent, which, for the avoidance of doubt, allows others to copy, distribute, and transmit the Work under the following conditions:
    1. Attribution—other users must attribute the Work in the manner specified by the author as indicated on the journal Web site;
    with the understanding that the above condition can be waived with permission from the Author and that where the Work or any of its elements is in the public domain under applicable law, that status is in no way affected by the license.
  4. The Author is able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the nonexclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the Work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), as long as there is provided in the document an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
  5. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post online a prepublication manuscript (but not the Publisher’s final formatted PDF version of the Work) in institutional repositories or on their Websites prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work. Any such posting made before acceptance and publication of the Work shall be updated upon publication to include a reference to the Publisher-assigned DOI (Digital Object Identifier) and a link to the online abstract for the final published Work in the Journal.
  6. Upon Publisher’s request, the Author agrees to furnish promptly to Publisher, at the Author’s own expense, written evidence of the permissions, licenses, and consents for use of third-party material included within the Work, except as determined by Publisher to be covered by the principles of Fair Use.
  7. The Author represents and warrants that:
    1. the Work is the Author’s original work;
    2. the Author has not transferred, and will not transfer, exclusive rights in the Work to any third party;
    3. the Work is not pending review or under consideration by another publisher;
    4. the Work has not previously been published;
    5. the Work contains no misrepresentation or infringement of the Work or property of other authors or third parties; and
    6. the Work contains no libel, invasion of privacy, or other unlawful matter.
  8. The Author agrees to indemnify and hold Publisher harmless from Author’s breach of the representations and warranties contained in Paragraph 6 above, as well as any claim or proceeding relating to Publisher’s use and publication of any content contained in the Work, including third-party content.

Revised 7/16/2018. Revision Description: Removed outdated link. 

Most read articles by the same author(s)