The Pedagogical Research (PedR) Group aims to promote, support and develop pedagogical research activity across the University. The benefits of a well-established PedR community include the development and embedding of an evidence informed approach to teaching and learning practice and an enhanced reputation for high quality scholarly activity.

Join us for the refreshed “Conversations with Cake” session’s. This session will focus on GenAI and Its Impact on the Well-being of Academic Staff in UK HE  led by Meryem Horasan, School of Management.

Meryem’s research explores how the integration of GenAI HE affects the well-being of academic staff. While GenAI has become a prominent topic in HE, with most universities issuing guidelines, much of the focus has been on students, overlooking its impact on staff. University guidelines often assume staff understand GenAI despite limited training and are typically vague, leaving staff to implement practices independently. This combination of presumed expertise and unclear guidance risks inconsistent application across HE institutions and places additional pressure on academic staff, potentially affecting their well-being.

Generative AI (GenAI) has become a widely discussed subject in higher education (HE) since late 2022. Almost all UK HE institutions have issued university-wide guidelines for staff and students on the use of GenAI tools in education. However, much of the concern and research has focused on how students use GenAI tools, resulting in a lack of research and consideration of its impact on staff.

My preliminary research involved reviewing a representative sample of 20 guidelines on the use of GenAI tools published by HE institutions in the UK. This analysis identified two key trends. First, university guidelines often assume academic staff have a good understanding of GenAI, despite limited formal training or resources. Second, these guidelines are often vague, leaving staff to independently interpret and decide on the appropriate use of GenAI tools. I argue that this combination of presumed expertise and vague guidance will result in inconsistent practices across institutions and departments, while also increasing pressure on academic staff to manage these complexities without sufficient support.

My motivation for this research stemmed from personal experience. As a teacher, I felt the pressure to adopt an informed stance on the use of GenAI, reflect it in my practice, and comply with university guidelines. The lack of clear direction left me exhausted. Conversations with colleagues revealed similar challenges and highlighted the insufficient consideration of the impact on academic staff and the lack of support. We are asked to adapt to an evolving environment, abandoning centuries-old traditional methods of teaching and assessment. I aim to critically examine how UK HE institutions are managing this transition. Objectives and Learning Outcomes This workshop aims to provide an interactive platform for academic staff to share their experiences of managing the impact of GenAI on their well-being. Participants will actively engage in small-group discussions, problem-solving tasks, and a plenary session for sharing insights, ensuring the session is both practical and reflective.

Participants will:

• Reflect on their experiences with the use of GenAI tools in teaching and assessment, including navigating vague institutional guidance

• Identify key challenges, such as digital burnout, job security concerns, and ethical dilemmas. • Explore strategies to address presumed expertise and support staff well-being.

• Contribute insights to future research aimed at informing higher education (HE) decision-makers about staff needs in the context of AI integration.

Session Structure (50 minutes)

1. Introduction (15 minutes) Brief overview of GenAI in UK HE, summarising findings from preliminary research.

2. Interactive Discussion (15 minutes) Breakout Groups: Participants will share their experiences of using GenAI tools. Themes include: • Training and preparedness. • Digital burnout and workload pressures. • Ethical concerns surrounding AI use in education and whether these concerns are addressed in university or department-based guidelines.

3. Group Problem-Solving Activity (10 minutes) Each group will brainstorm practical solutions to one of the challenges discussed.

4. Plenary Session (10 minutes) Groups will present their action plans. Common themes and recommendations will be identified to inform participants’ practices and my ongoing research.

Refreshments and cakes will be available, please bring your own cups and you are welcome to bring lunch.