Course number: RPTA 110 Research and Evaluation in RPT

Empowering Students, Use AI Responsibly, Revising Paper Using AI

Reflection on Instructional Change:

In RPTA 110: Research and Evaluation in Recreation, Parks, and Tourism, I implemented the practice of Empowering Students to Use AI Responsibly from the ACUE Gen AI course. Specifically, I designed a lecture for Week 15 focused on helping students use AI tools to revise their program/service evaluation proposals. To prepare, I identified accessible AI tools, created examples demonstrating how to use them for editing and improving clarity, and emphasized ethical guidelines, such as maintaining originality and avoiding over-reliance on automation. I integrated this practice because I wanted students to see AI as a tool that enhances, rather than replaces, their critical thinking and writing skills. These steps were crucial for equipping students with both the technical know-how and the ethical framework to use AI responsibly in their academic work and future careers.

Implementing this practice enhanced student engagement and motivation. While this lecture has not yet occurred, I anticipate that many students will find the use of AI tools both intriguing and practical, especially as they work to refine their final proposals. Some students might express curiosity and excitement, eager to explore these tools, while others may show hesitancy, worrying about maintaining originality or fairness. Based on past discussions about technology, I expect that a few students will already be familiar with AI tools and may share their experiences. This range of reactions will likely generate a rich conversation about how AI can be effectively and ethically integrated into academic tasks, deepening students' understanding and fostering a collaborative learning environment.

The ACUE Gen AI Course’s Discussion and Reflection activity was particularly influential in shaping my approach. This activity prompted me to think critically about how to guide students in balancing the benefits and limitations of AI tools.

During the "Observe and Analyze" session with my colleagues, my key takeaway was the importance of framing AI as a collaborative partner rather than a replacement for student effort. This perspective shifted how I approached teaching with AI, encouraging me to design activities that emphasize how AI can support critical thinking rather than bypass it. The session reinforced my confidence in introducing AI to my students while fostering a learning environment that values ethical responsibility and intellectual curiosity.

Evidence of Instructional Change


Lecture Slide		Badge

Practice and Reflect Teaching and Learning with AI:

The AI ACUE course inspired me to integrate a AI tool into my teaching, enhancing student writing and confidence. While it improved learning outcomes and reduced writing anxiety, challenges included addressing diverse comfort levels with AI and emphasizing ethical usage. This experience highlighted AI's potential to support inclusive, accessible education.

Course Syllabus

Faculty Bio

faculty bio
	Dr. JungYun Hur is an Associate Professor in the Department of Recreation, Parks, and Tourism Administration at Sac State. Her areas of specialty are Hospitality, Tourism and Event Management. She received her Ph.D in Hospitality &Tourism Management at Purdue University in 2016, MBA at Sookmyung Women's University in South Korea, and MS in international hospitality and tourism management at Griffith University, Australia. She has over ten years of hospitality industry experience in New Zealand, Australia, and South Korea. Her research areas are consumer behavior, service management and special interest tourism.

Funding
	This work was supported by: US Department of Education Hispanic Serving Institution Project TECH4Equity US Department of Education Hispanic Serving Institution Project STEM4Equity P031C210012 *Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation or the US Department of Education.