How is the use of artificial intelligence regulated at public universities in Austria?

Abstract

Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Large Language Models (LLMs) have experienced rapid advancement and adoption. While these technologies are useful tools in the fields of research and learning within higher education, their regulation, or the lack there of, raises concerns around Academic Integrity. This thesis aims to explore how public universities in Austria are responding to these new and growing challenges by examining the strategies they employ to regulate the use of AI/LLMs. Using a qualitative, exploratory research design this research combines a thematic document analysis with expert interviews. The scope of this study extended to all public universities in Austria (n=23). These documents specifically pertain to the universities’ individual current regulation and rules regarding the use of AI. A total of 25 documents were analysed using Braun and Clarke’s (2006) approach to thematic coding to identify overlap and divergence on university policy relating to AI. To complement the analysis on university documents, expert interviews were conducted with individuals intimately familiar with the subject matter, to provide deeper insight into institutional decision making. Up to 43.5% of universities (n=10) were unable to share documents on the subject of AI, despite a government mandate to provide guidance on the topic. When documents were present, they displayed a strong underlying compliancy ruleset covering Academic Integrity and Good Scientific Practice, intellectual property rights and data protection and a strong focus on citations and student competency – a finding supported by expert opinion. Further insights include disunity in taking a general stance on AI, with only 9 of 13 universities doing so, and little explicit encouragement of AI, with only 6 of 13 universities displaying passages to this effect. This thesis concludes that the regulation of AI at public universities in Austria is functional, leaving much room to be desired in the form of clarity, both on a national and institutional level.