As generative AI becomes increasingly embedded in research, teaching, and professional practice, postgraduate programmes across the sector are grappling with what “responsible” and “ethical” engagement looks like. At UWE Bristol, the Professional Doctorate in Education (EdD) team have been taking a proactive approach and introduced structured conversations, transparent processes, and collaborative teaching to help students navigate the opportunities and challenges of AI.
We spoke with the three colleagues who lead the discussion: Co-leaders of the Professional Doctorate in Education – Professor Richard Waller and Professor Jane Andrews, and Dr Jake Bacon, Senior Lecturer in Education. Together, they shared how the EdD programme is evolving its practice, the importance of dialogue, and why integrity sits at the heart of their approach.
Background: Why the EdD Team is focusing on AI
The EdD combines taught postgraduate learning with doctoral-level research, creating a unique environment where students must navigate both pedagogic and research implications of AI.
The team recently completed the periodic university revalidation process for the EdD, during which their approach to AI was commended, particularly the way they have woven AI discussions into programme design, supervision culture, and research practice.
With sector guidance continuing to develop, from UWE policy (see the internal AI hub) and the Doctoral Academy, through to UKRI, ESRC and UKCGE), the programme is actively positioning itself “on the front foot”.
“Doing nothing doesn’t feel viable,” Jane explains. “We want to stay in conversation with our students, remain transparent, and protect the dialogic pedagogy that is central to the EdD.”
Why was it important to bring AI explicitly into the EdD programme?
Richard: Jane and I don’t claim technical expertise in how AI works, but AI is here, and it’s here to stay; we can’t get that genie back into the bottle. The question for us is how to help our EdD candidates, all of whom are practising educators, understand its implications for teaching, learning, writing and research. The validation panel encouraged us to share what we were doing, which was reassuring, and a nice form of recognition for the team’s efforts.
Jane: The EdD is a bridge between taught and research learning. That means AI intersects with everything: literature reviews, ethics, supervision, assessment, journal publishing, research design. We realised early on that we needed structured conversations rather than silence or uncertainty.
How have you built AI discussions into the teaching?
Jane: We begin the programme with an open, non-judgemental session where Jake introduces generative AI tools and invites students to explore them together. Richard and I join that session not as experts but as co-learners; that’s been really important for modelling the discussion. Jake is much more of an expert, as is another colleague, Mark Avery, and we have joined our doctoral students in learning from them.
Jake: When AI tools exploded in 2022, I knew students would soon be using them, or avoiding them, without guidance. So, I built a resource called ‘Let’s Have a Conversation About Generative AI’ using Adobe Express. It’s designed to prompt reflection, not prescribe rules.
My role isn’t to tell students to use AI. I follow what I call a ‘frugal AI’ approach. We talk about using AI only when it adds value, and always with awareness of ethics and institutional policy.
What does “integrity” mean in this context?
Richard: The phrase comes from UKRI’s recent guidance on AI. For doctoral education, integrity means originality, appropriate use of tools, and transparency about how work is produced. AI is not an author, our journals like the British Education Research Journal are clear about that. And as examiners, particularly in vivas, we need to be confident the work represents the student’s own critical and original contribution to knowledge.
Jane: Transparency is key. That’s why we developed a simple AI self-declaration form. It isn’t compulsory, and it isn’t policing. It’s there to help students articulate what they used and why. Many hadn’t realised they needed to think that through.
Are EdD students using AI in their research?
Jake: Yes, increasingly so. I supervise several doctoral students researching generative AI itself: student experiences, staff perceptions, academic integrity. Others are using AI methodologically, for example, as a support tool in data analysis. We’re seeing tools like Copilot appear in Teams interviews as standard features now. So, part of our role is helping students understand when that’s appropriate, and how to justify its use.
What challenges have you encountered from staff or students?
Jake: Some students say: ‘Why are you promoting it? I don’t want to use it.’ Others fear it’ll encourage cheating. I always go back to the metaphor: AI is a copilot; the student must be the pilot. AI supports the process; it shouldn’t drive it. Some colleagues also worry about increased workload, feeling they must become ‘detectives’. We try to reframe AI as part of an ethical learning process rather than a policing issue.”
What’s next for the EdD?
Jane: We’re keeping a close eye on developments across UWE, the sector, and research funders. Policies are emerging fast, sometimes faster than institutional processes can keep up with, so our best strategy is to stay in dialogue.
Richard: And to stay open. Students and staff will continue to bring questions about AI in publishing, reviewing, ethics, assessment, and viva practices. We want to make the EdD a space where those conversations are welcomed and supported.
Key Principles guiding the programme
The team summarise their approach through three commitments:
- Stay proactive – Being on the front foot helps minimise risks, reduce anxiety, and strengthen research integrity.
- Keep conversations open and transparent – Dialogue, not surveillance, underpins the EdD’s pedagogical approach.
- Track policy and sector developments – From UWE guidance to UKRI, ESRC, journals and UKCGE, the landscape is shifting rapidly.
Resources
- UWE AI hub (internal only)
- ‘Let’s Have a Conversation About Generative AI’ – Some Examples for Discussion and Practice From BA Education – UWE, Bristol
- The environmental ethics of Generative AI: Artificial intelligence or real ignorance? | BERA – origin of the idea of ‘frugal AI’
- “Embracing Gen AI with Integrity” what might this mean on the Professional Doctorate in Education – Good Practice Session (GPS)