Educator and Student Experiences of AI Integration in Higher Education Pedagogy
Abstract
This study explored educators’ and students’ experiences of integrating artificial intelligence (AI) in higher education pedagogy. Guided by Sociotechnical Systems Theory (STS) and the transformative paradigm, it examined how AI influences teaching, learning, and assessment while raising issues of equity, ethics, and academic integrity. Using a qualitative phenomenological design, data were collected through semi-structured interviews, focus group discussions, and reflective journals from 26 participants, including students, lecturers, and academic leaders. Thematic analysis identified seven themes: enhanced efficiency and professionalization; curriculum and assessment transformation; originality and academic integrity concerns; digital divide and fairness; critical thinking and independent learning; institutional preparedness and ethics; and responsible, inclusive integration. Participants acknowledged AI’s capacity to improve productivity, accessibility, and learning support but cautioned against overreliance, inequities, and ethical uncertainties. The study highlights the need for ethical AI literacy, institutional preparedness, and equitable access to technology. Its novelty lies in combining educator and student perspectives to reveal how human and technological systems co-evolve within the digital transformation of higher education.
Downloads
References
Baxter, G., & Sommerville, I. (2011). Socio-technical systems: From design methods to systems engineering. Interacting with Computers, 23(1), 4–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intcom.2010.07.003
Bockting, C. L., Van Dis, E. A., Van Rooij, R., Zuidema, W., & Bollen, J. (2023). Living guidelines for generative AI—Why scientists must oversee its use. Nature, 622(7984), 693–696. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-023-03266-1
Bond, M., Khosravi, H., De Laat, M., Bergdahl, N., Negrea, V., Oxley, E., Pham, P., Chong, S. W., & Siemens, G. (2023). A meta systematic review of artificial intelligence in higher education: A call for increased ethics, collaboration, and rigour. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-023-00405-7
Bostrom, R. P., & Heinen, J. S. (1977). MIS problems and failures: A socio-technical perspective, Part II: The application of socio-technical theory. MIS Quarterly, 1(4), 11–28. https://doi.org/10.2307/248710
Chan, C. K. Y. (2023). A comprehensive AI policy education framework for university teaching and learning. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 20, Article 38. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-023-00408-3
Cotton, D. R. E., Cotton, P. A., & Shipway, J. R. (2023). Chatting and cheating: Ensuring academic integrity in the era of ChatGPT. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 60(2), 148–159. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2023.2190148
Cotton, D. R. E., Cotton, P. A., & Shipway, J. R. (2024). Chatting and cheating: Ensuring academic integrity in the era of ChatGPT. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 61(2), 228–239. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2023.2190148
Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2016). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (4th ed.). Sage.
Holmes, W. (2023). The unintended consequences of artificial intelligence and education. Routledge.
Holmes, W., & Tuomi, I. (2022). State of the art and practice in AI in education. European Journal of Education, 57(3), 1–29. https://doi.org/10.1111/ejed.12533
Holmes, W., Porayska-Pomsta, K., Holstein, K., Sutherland, E., Baker, T., Shum, S. B., Santos, O. C., Rodrigo, M. T., Cukurova, M., Bittencourt, I. I., & Koedinger, K. R. (2021). Ethics of AI in education: Towards a community-wide framework. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 31(4), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-021-00239-1
Kasneci, E., Sessler, K., Küchemann, S., Bannert, M., Dementieva, D., Fischer, F., Gasser, U., Groh, G., Günnemann, S., Hüllermeier, E., Krusche, S., Kutyniok, G., Michaeli, T., Nerdel, C., Pfeffer, J., Poquet, O., Sailer, M., Schmidt, A., Seidel, T., Stadler, M., Weller, J., Kuhn, J., & Kasneci, G. (2023). ChatGPT for good? On opportunities and challenges of large language models for education. Learning and Individual Differences, 103, 102274. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2023.102274
Kizilcec, R. F., & Lee, H. (2022). Algorithmic fairness in education. In W. Holmes & K. Porayska-Pomsta (Eds.), Ethics in artificial intelligence in education (pp. 174–202). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429329067-10
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Sage.
Luckin, R., & Cukurova, M. (2019). Designing educational technologies in the age of AI: A learning sciences-driven approach. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(6), 2824–2838. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12861
Luckin, R., Holmes, W., Griffiths, M., & Forcier, L. B. (2016). Intelligence unleashed: An argument for AI in education. Pearson.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. Freeman.
Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (4th Ed.). Pearson.
Lin, T-J, Liang, J.-C., & Tsai, C.-C. (2015a). Identifying Taiwanese university students’ physics learning profiles and their role in physics learning self-efficacy. Research in Science Education, 45(4), 605-624. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-014-9440-z
Mertens, D. M. (2010). Philosophy in mixed methods teaching: The transformative paradigm as illustration. International Journal of Multiple Research Approaches, 4(1), 9–18. https://doi.org/10.5172/mra.2010.4.1.009
Mertens, D. M. (2019). Research and evaluation in education and psychology: Integrating diversity with quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods. Sage.
Mpofu, P., & Machingauta, T. T. (2024). Challenges and strategies for effective online examinations in higher education institutions: Insights from lecturers and students. International Journal of Educational Management and Development Studies, 5(2), 187–208. https://doi.org/10.53378/353068
Pasmore, W. A., Winby, S., Mohrman, S. A., & Vanasse, R. (2019). Reflections: Sociotechnical systems design and organization change. Journal of Change Management, 19(2), 67–85. https://doi.org/10.1080/14697017.2018.1553761
Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research & evaluation methods: Integrating theory and practice (4th ed.). Sage.
Perkins, M. (2023). Academic integrity considerations of AI large language models in the post-pandemic era: ChatGPT and beyond. Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice, 20(2), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.53761/1.20.02.07
Popenici, S. A. D., & Kerr, S. (2017). Exploring the impact of artificial intelligence on teaching and learning in higher education. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 12(1), 22. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41039-017-0062-8
Selwyn, N., Hillman, T., & Bergviken Rensfeldt, A. (2023). Digital technologies and the automation of education—Key questions and concerns. Postdigital Science and Education, 5, 15–24. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42438-021-00263-3
The Australian. (2025, October 6). AI cheating in university assignments is “all but impossible to detect”, regulator TEQSA warns as it demands better scrutiny of exams.
The Guardian. (2025, February 26). UK universities warned to “stress-test” assessments as 92% of students use AI.
Tayeh, S. A. (2025). Integrating artificial intelligence into curriculum design: Strategies for enhancing teaching methods in primary education. TPM – Testing, Psychometrics, Methodology in Applied Psychology, 32(S4), 1696–1713. https://tpmap.org/submission/index.php/tpm/article/view/1046
Tlili, A., Shehata, B., Adarkwah, M. A., Bozkurt, A., Hickey, D. T., & Burgos, D. (2023). What if the devil is my guardian angel: ChatGPT as a case study of using chatbots in education. Smart Learning Environments, 10(1), 15. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-023-00237-x
van Dis, E. A. M., Bollen, J., Zuidema, W., van Rooij, R., & Bockting, C. L. H. (2023). ChatGPT: Five priorities for research. Nature, 614(7947), 224–226. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-023-00288-7
Williamson, B. (2024). The social life of AI in education. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 34, 97–104. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-023-00342-5
Yüksel, P., & Yıldırım, S. (2015). Theoretical frameworks, methods, and procedures for conducting phenomenological studies in educational settings. Turkish Online Journal of Qualitative Inquiry, 6(1), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.17569/tojqi.59813
Zawacki-Richter, O., Marín, V. I., Bond, M., & Gouverneur, F. (2019). Systematic review of research on artificial intelligence applications in higher education: Where are the educators? International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 16(1), 39. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-019-0171-0
Copyright (c) 2025 Studies in Learning and Teaching
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
