Terms of Service: Coming to Terms with AI-Generated Art in the Classroom’
Open accessAbstract
This paper describes the plan and design of a new course, entitled “AI & Art.” The course introduces select tools made possible by generative artificial intelligence and large language models (LLMs). Learning theories that inform course development are briefly discussed. Offered as a studio art elective to satisfy the University Curriculum breadth requirement, “AI & Art” was first launched as a seven weeklong Special Topics course at Quinnipiac University. Career readiness competencies identified by the National Association of Colleges and Employers (NACE) are compared to Essential Learning Outcomes and Course Learning Outcomes. Course organization includes a discussion of written responses about select topics, critiques of generated images, followed by practice in writing effective prompts. Students are encouraged to experiment with ChatGPT (OpenAI, 2024a). However, their written responses must pass multiple AI detection tests and be at least 51% “likely to be written by a human!” In accepting the Terms of Service for these AI tools, students are encouraged to exercise the precautionary principle–to critically think about the images they generate and to ask if they (or the AI) are consciously or unconsciously reproducing or reinforcing bias or stereotypes that reifies social inequalities. The results of a student course survey that pertain to engagement are included and discussed along with the pros and cons regarding the adoption of these AI tools.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
A seven-week course case reports high engagement and rapid ideation, but relies on perception measures and a small single context sample.
“A seven week course case using surveys, reflections, and course metrics reports high engagement and rapid ideation, but relies on perception measures and a small single context sample (Garvey 2025).”
From A Study on the Role of Midjourney, A Generative Artificial Intelligence Tool, in Enhancing Student Creativity in Illustration Design Classes (2026) · cites this paper as Garvey 2025
The Introduction reports full enrollment in both 2024 semesters, and Student Course Survey Responses reports student engagement while noting low response counts (Fall n=7; Spring n=13). The course is described as an accelerated seven-week online course, so the small, single-course context and reliance on student perceptions are fair characterizations. However, the paper does not report rapid ideation as a course finding; it discusses quick image creation more generally. Written responses are described as coursework, not clearly as a measure used to establish that finding. (LLM, conf=0.84)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 11
- Anderson, Lorin W., David R. Krathwohl, and Benjamin S. Bloom. A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom's taxonomy of educational objectives (Complete edition.). London, UK: Longman, 2001.
- Baudrillard, Jean. Simulacra and simulation. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press, 1994.
- Bruner, Jerome S. Toward a theory of instruction. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press, 1966.
- Garvey, Gregory. "Perspective chapter: Ungrading, grading contracts, gamification & game based learning." In Active learning -research and practice, edited by Delfín Ortega-Sánchez, 167-197. New York, NY: IntechOpen, 2022. https://www.intechopen.com/chapters/ 83149.
- Kay, Alan. User interface: A personal view. In The Art of Human-computer Interface Design, edited by Brenda Laurel, 191-207. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Pub. Co., 1990.
- Maslow, Abraham H. "A theory of human motivation." Psychological Review 50 no. 4 (1943): 370-396.
- Renfro, Wesley B. CAS draft strategic plan for review and feedback. Direct email message to author, August 21, 2024.
- Salovey, Peter, and John D. Mayer. "Emotional intelligence." Imagination, Cognition, and Personality, 9, no. 3 (1990): 185-211.
- Sternberg, Robert. J. Beyond IQ: A triarchic theory of human intelligence. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1985.
- Shabani, Karim, Khatib Mohammad, and Saman Ebadi. "Vygotsky's zone of proximal development: Instructional implications and teachers' professional development." English Language Teaching, 3, no. 4 (2010): 237-248.
- Waterhouse, Lynn. "Why multiple intelligences theory is a neuromyth." Frontiers in Psychology, 14 (August 27, 2023): 1217288. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1049 3274/.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
He, S. (2026) · Journal of Computer Assisted Learning · doi:10.1002/jcal.70305
- Authors
- Garvey, G. P.
- Affiliations
- Quinnipiac University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Garvey, Gregory P.
- ORCID
- Garvey, Gregory P.
- Venue
- Athens Journal of Humanities & Arts
- Published
- 2025-09-28
- Volume
- 12
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 345-386
- ISSN
- 2241-7702 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4414580185
- Cited by
- 0
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 0.00
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- diamond
- doi.org
- Licence
- cc-by-nc
- Locations
- Athens Journal of Humanities and Arts (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Artificial Intelligence in Education
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Visual Arts and Performing Arts › Art Education and Development
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Visual Arts and Performing Arts › Art, Technology, and Culture
- Keywords
- AI-generated art, generative AI, large language models, ChatGPT, AI detection, prompt writing, critical thinking, student engagement, precautionary principle, AI adoption in higher education
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
