Why clear GenAI guidance matters to neurodivergent students. And how to get it right

As generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) becomes increasingly embedded in higher education, students are receiving mixed messages about what is and is not allowed. For neurodivergent students, this ambiguity can heighten anxiety and undermine confidence. While we all recognise that developing skills in responsible GenAI use is important, and that these skills will be important for students’ future personal and work lives, there’s no universal approach, meaning that students often encounter different rules and expectations across their courses. For neurodivergent students, this inconsistency can create barriers to effective GenAI use.

Why consistency matters

For neurodivergent students, even small variations in how information is presented can have a disproportionate impact on confidence and engagement. When each course communicates its own approach to GenAI use, with different formats, tones or levels of detail, the result is cognitive overload and uncertainty. Clear, consistent expectations remove the guesswork and give every learner a fair chance to succeed.

If lecturers only mention guidelines on GenAI use in a few slides of a lecture, if they are “hidden” away in a page on the learning management system or use ambiguous language, they not only risk students misunderstanding them but create anxiety to the point where students avoid using these tools altogether for fear of being accused of academic misconduct. 

I empathise as someone who is autistic and has ADHD; if I struggle to work out what counts as “permitted” or “not permitted” use of GenAI, or even where to find this information, I can see why students might withdraw from using these tools entirely. Without clarity, we risk deterring students from using tools that could support their learning, widening the very inequities we are working to close.

Design against mixed messages

The good news is that mixed messages aren’t inevitable. By drawing on Universal Design for Learning (UDL) and fostering a neuroaffirmative culture, we create clarity around GenAI use, supporting all learners and offering particular value to neurodivergent students. 

Create a culture of responsible and transparent GenAI use

This is not about policing; it is about giving students the confidence to engage with GenAI without fear of punitive consequences.

Make it easy to ask questions

Create safe, low-pressure spaces for students to seek clarification, such as anonymous discussion boards, polls or a lecture Q&A so that students can raise concerns and ask questions without fear of being judged.

Co-create boundaries

Involve students in shaping examples of prompts or permitted uses for a course or assignments. Co-creation makes expectations clearer, builds shared ownership and is especially valuable for neurodivergent students who benefit from concrete, predictable examples.

Offer low-stakes opportunities for practice

Let students explore GenAI before they face an assessment. In our access and international foundation mathematics and statistics courses, students critique AI-generated explanations, identify errors and compare solutions with worked examples. This hands-on practice reduces anxiety and builds AI criticality.

Align expectations across a programme

Conflicting messages create confusion. While full standardisation is not always possible across a large institution, agree on a shared language, common template and consistent VLE location to give students a recognisable pattern to rely on and reduce cognitive load.

• Spotlight guide: Bringing GenAI into the university classroom
• Three ways to use ChatGPT to enhance students’ critical thinking in the classroom
• Is AI literacy an information skill?

Normalise transparency

Encourage students to declare GenAI use as they would any other source. If staff model their own responsible use, such as by declaring GenAI use to draft quiz questions, it helps reduce stigma and demonstrates what ethical practice looks like.

Highlight GenAI as an assistive tool

Remind students that GenAI can be used to support learning; it can break down tasks, clarify concepts, summarise lectures and create study timetables. Frame GenAI as a learning-enhancement tool, rather than a shortcut, to widen its value and reduce fear.

Communicate GenAI policies clearly and in multiple formats

Guidance should be easy to locate, consistently referenced and available in more than one format. A simple one-page “permitted/not permitted” guide for each assessment can reduce ambiguity.

Image

Provide concrete examples rather than abstract rules

Instead of saying “AI must not be used to generate assessed work”, give concrete prompts for how it can and cannot be used to support learning.  Examples are far easier to follow than policy statements. For instance:

• Permitted: “Explain the differences between two statistical tests.”
• Not permitted: “Write my methods section.”

When these practices are adopted across a course or programme, they not only reduce uncertainty for neurodivergent learners but establish transparent expectations for all students. Designing with those at the margins in mind strengthens the learning environment for everyone and supports more equitable engagement with GenAI.

GenAI use declaration: ChatGPT 5.1 was used to support early drafting and for clarity. All ideas and final wording are my own, and I take full responsibility for the article.

Jayne Quoiani is head of STEM at the University of Edinburgh’s Centre for Open Learning, where she leads inclusive STEM programmes and develops equitable learning systems. 

If you would like advice and insight from academics and university staff delivered direct to your inbox each week, sign up for the Campus newsletter.