Lessons from Launching an AI Faculty Institute
With artificial intelligence playing an integral role in reshaping higher education, many institutions are exploring how to help faculty move beyond curiosity and experimentation toward meaningful, responsible integration of AI into teaching and research. At The College of New Jersey (TCNJ), that journey began with faculty engaging with AI in a variety of ways, but without a shared framework or common starting point. Some faculty members were actively exploring new tools and possibilities, while others were unsure where to begin or were looking for guidance on how AI could support their disciplines.
Recognizing the need for a more intentional approach, TCNJ’s Center for Excellence in Teaching and Learning (CETL) partnered with faculty colleagues across campus to create a five-week, online, stipend-supported AI-Enhanced Pedagogies Institute for faculty. The program supported more than 55 full-time faculty members in developing practical, discipline-informed approaches to AI and offered valuable lessons on building engagement, fostering collaboration, and creating opportunities for thoughtful AI adoption across campus. “Prior to the creation of the Institute, we had been talking about AI with faculty as soon as ChatGPT came on the scene,” shares Judi Cook, Executive Director, CETL, TCNJ. “We had some faculty who were innovating and looking for support, others who didn’t want to engage, and many who were curious about AI but weren’t sure where to start.”
TCNJ started building AI awareness through more than 30 workshops, meetings, and discussions. However, the conversations often returned to the same foundational questions about the role of AI in teaching and learning, highlighting the need for a more structured approach. “Last July we received approval to join the AAC&U Institute on AI, Pedagogy, and the Curriculum, which is a team-based program that helps institutions develop strategies for integrating AI into teaching, learning, and academic programs,” explains Cook. “This was a catalyst to bring together CETL staff and interested faculty members to think more intentionally about how to support faculty and shape a more focused AI initiative.”
“We included AI transparency statements into the course design to normalize how we, as facilitators, were very transparent about our own generative AI use. That allowed us to give faculty an example of how to build and maintain trust, model ethical practices, and establish their own boundaries in the classroom. We gave faculty language they could use as they develop their own classes or incorporate similar approaches if they choose to use AI.”
– Ellen Farr
Director of Online Learning
TCNJ
Building a Community of Practice
Over time, TCNJ’s AI discussions grew beyond questions about individual tools and classroom experimentation to broader conversations about the skills students need to succeed in an AI-informed world. “We try to listen to what the faculty are asking for on campus and design opportunities for them to weigh in and help us build program structures,” explains Ellen Farr, Director of Online Learning, CETL, TCNJ.
The development of TCNJ’s AI-Enhanced Pedagogies Institute was shaped by both external learning and internal collaboration. Through participation in the AAC&U Institute in AI Pedagogy in the Curriculum, CETL leaders gained insight into emerging models for faculty AI development at other institutions while also working with campus leadership and faculty to identify what would best support TCNJ’s community. “Through the work with AAC&U, we were exposed to many great examples from other institutions that were developing faculty AI programs,” says Cook. “We were admiring what they had built and excited about the possibilities for TCNJ. At the same time, we were having conversations with our new provost about what faculty on our campus needed.”
“We set out to build a community of practice and help faculty establish some language about how to talk about and use the tools in more generic terms,” adds Farr. “Every time we turn around, there’s a new iteration, so we wanted to think holistically about what this is, how you can become literate in AI usage, and what it can mean for your own pedagogical practice.” The program also evolved during implementation to respond to faculty feedback—for example, the Institute had discussion boards where faculty requested access to broader conversations beyond their assigned groups. “It was fantastic to see they were interested in learning from each other,” Farr adds.
Supporting Faculty Learning and Development
With the overall framework in place, the next step was determining how the Institute would best support faculty learning and engagement. “Ellen and I both approach program design by starting with the desired outcome and working backward,” explains Cook. “We considered what faculty were asking for and what would be the right format. The five-week timeframe seemed sufficient to build habits and give people a chance to cover a lot of territory, but short enough to fit inside a semester. We didn’t want to monopolize instructors’ time, but make it manageable, with meaningful chunks that faculty could engage with alongside their other responsibilities.”
“The stipend was important because we wanted to recognize that this was meaningful work and that faculty were investing time beyond their regular responsibilities,” continues Cook. “TCNJ also wished to demonstrate their commitment to supporting and compensating faculty for that effort. We were fortunate that our provost was very supportive and listened to our plan. I think the Institute was successful because of the collaboration with faculty, bringing examples from other institutions, and building a strong rationale for each decision we made.”
Another key design decision was making the AI-Enhanced Pedagogies Institute fully online. While the format provided the flexibility needed to accommodate 55 full-time faculty members with varied schedules, it also created an opportunity to model effective online learning practices and showcase resources available to faculty. “We wanted to model best practices for faculty who might consider doing something similar in their own classes, even if it’s just implementing a small module within a course,” says Farr. “Through the Institute’s design, faculty experienced strategies such as clear content organization, multiple ways to engage with material, and universal design principles in practice.”
The AI-Enhanced Pedagogies Institute also incorporated AI transparency into its own design, giving faculty an example of how to communicate openly about AI use in a learning environment. “We included AI transparency statements into the course design to normalize how we, as facilitators, were very transparent about our own generative AI use,” says Farr. “That allowed us to give faculty an example of how to build and maintain trust, model ethical practices, and establish their own boundaries in the classroom. We gave faculty language they could use as they develop their own classes or incorporate similar approaches if they choose to use AI.”
“The horizontal learning that happened across the program was just as important as the content itself. One of the key lessons has been the value of community, both within TCNJ and across higher education, including Edge, AAC&U, OLC, and EDUCAUSE. Don’t let perfection be the enemy of good. If we had waited for everything to settle, we never would have launched. Just get started.”
– Judi Cook
Executive Director, CETL
TCNJ
Creating Opportunities for Collaboration
Since AI’s impact can vary widely across disciplines, TCNJ encouraged faculty to connect discussions to their own fields and teaching contexts and learn from perspectives that differed from their own. “Faculty could ground their responses in their own perspectives and see the comparisons and contrasts across different areas, from humanities to business,” says Cook. “It can be hard to have conversations about AI in an online environment because it can be an uncomfortable topic. I was grateful for how rich and respectful the conversations were. People were very open to sharing ideas, even when they didn’t agree with each other. I think it’s a good lesson that a healthy campus isn’t necessarily one where everyone agrees, but where everyone can talk and work through ideas respectfully.”
With the CETL already engaged in conversations with academic leaders and faculty governance groups, the team had a sense of the questions, concerns, and differing viewpoints that existed around AI. “Judi and I had already presented to academic leaders and the faculty senate, so we had a sense of the temperature on campus,” explains Farr. “Some faculty were approaching AI from a very skeptical or even fearful viewpoint, so we wanted to acknowledge that perspective. We also wanted to create opportunities for different perspectives to be heard. Someone who was more hesitant could read comments from someone who was approaching AI with more enthusiasm and curiosity.”
Rather than viewing the program as a fixed experience, the team created opportunities throughout the five weeks for participants to share what was working, what they needed, and where additional support could be helpful. “We hosted faculty gatherings during the semester where anyone from the group who was interested could come together and talk about what was happening,” explains Cook. “We also hosted virtual guest speakers from other campuses. The AAC&U group introduced us to a number of people from around the country, and we invited them to join us through Zoom and lead workshops. Being flexible and creating opportunities for participants to tell us when something wasn’t working—or when something needed to evolve—allowed us to be responsive throughout the process.”
Developing AI Fluency and Confidence
Following the five-week period, faculty completed a survey where one of the most significant outcomes was a shift in faculty confidence. “We asked faculty if they were confident in their ability to guide students on AI academic judgment,” says Cook. “Before the AI-Enhanced Pedagogies Institute, 48% said they were not confident. By the end, that dropped to 2.6%, and 71% of participants reported that the Institute helped them talk with students about ethical AI use. Faculty engagement also exceeded expectations. While the team initially planned for 15 participants, more than 50 faculty members enrolled in the Institute, prompting additional support from campus leadership to expand the program.”
“One thing that surprised me was how much faculty commented on the end-of-module tasks and how useful they were,” continues Cook. “Whether it was revising a syllabus statement or redesigning an assignment to be AI-aware, they were creating real things they could use and sharing them with colleagues. That turned out to be one of the biggest benefits of the program.”
Looking ahead, the AI-Enhanced Pedagogies Institute will continue to be an evolving part of TCNJ’s faculty development strategy. “We want to be seen as partners and resources and will keep listening to faculty and using their feedback to inform future decisions,” says Cook. Farr adds that expanding participation will be just as important as refining the curriculum. “For this to become part of the institutional infrastructure, we have to continue bringing new voices into the conversation while staying in tune with how faculty needs are evolving.”
For institutions considering a similar initiative, the greatest value comes not only from developing quality content, but from creating opportunities for faculty to learn from one another. “The horizontal learning that happened across the program was just as important as the content itself,” says Cook. “One of the key lessons has been the value of community, both within TCNJ and across higher education, including Edge, AAC&U, OLC, and EDUCAUSE.” Farr adds, “Don’t let perfection be the enemy of good. If we had waited for everything to settle, we never would have launched. Just get started.”
By grounding the initiative in faculty collaboration, institutional support, and continuous refinement, the team created a model that can evolve alongside new technologies while remaining responsive to the needs of both educators and students. “It requires thoughtful program design, opportunities for faculty to learn from one another, and practical guidance they can apply in their own teaching,” says Cook. “More importantly, it means thinking about AI faculty development not as a one-time workshop, but as an ongoing institutional commitment that can grow and adapt as the technology evolves.”