Is AI Changing the Rules of Academic Misconduct? An In-depth Look at Students' Perceptions of 'AI-giarism'

This pioneering study explores students' perceptions of AI-giarism, an emergent form of academic dishonesty involving AI and plagiarism, within the higher education context. A survey, undertaken by 393 undergraduate and postgraduate students from a variety of disciplines, investigated their perceptions of diverse AI-giarism scenarios. The findings portray a complex landscape of understanding, with clear disapproval for direct AI content generation, yet more ambivalent attitudes towards subtler uses of AI. The study introduces a novel instrument, as an initial conceptualization of AI-giarism, offering a significant tool for educators and policy-makers. This scale facilitates understanding and discussions around AI-related academic misconduct, aiding in pedagogical design and assessment in an era of AI integration. Moreover, it challenges traditional definitions of academic misconduct, emphasizing the need to adapt in response to evolving AI technology. Despite limitations, such as the rapidly changing nature of AI and the use of convenience sampling, the study provides pivotal insights for academia, policy-making, and the broader integration of AI technology in education.

The AI generation gap: Are Gen Z students more interested in adopting generative AI such as ChatGPT in teaching and learning than their Gen X and Millennial Generation teachers?

This study aimed to explore the experiences, perceptions, knowledge, concerns, and intentions of Gen Z students with Gen X and Gen Y teachers regarding the use of generative AI (GenAI) in higher education. A sample of students and teachers were recruited to investigate the above using a survey consisting of both open and closed questions. The findings showed that Gen Z participants were generally optimistic about the potential benefits of GenAI, including enhanced productivity, efficiency, and personalized learning, and expressed intentions to use GenAI for various educational purposes. Gen X and Gen Y teachers acknowledged the potential benefits of GenAI but expressed heightened concerns about overreliance, ethical and pedagogical implications, emphasizing the need for proper guidelines and policies to ensure responsible use of the technology. The study highlighted the importance of combining technology with traditional teaching methods to provide a more effective learning experience. Implications of the findings include the need to develop evidence-based guidelines and policies for GenAI integration, foster critical thinking and digital literacy skills among students, and promote responsible use of GenAI technologies in higher education.

Deconstructing Student Perceptions of Generative AI (GenAI) through an Expectancy Value Theory (EVT)-based Instrument

This study examines the relationship between student perceptions and their intention to use generative AI in higher education. Drawing on Expectancy-Value Theory (EVT), a questionnaire was developed to measure students' knowledge of generative AI, perceived value, and perceived cost. A sample of 405 students participated in the study, and confirmatory factor analysis was used to validate the constructs. The results indicate a strong positive correlation between perceived value and intention to use generative AI, and a weak negative correlation between perceived cost and intention to use. As we continue to explore the implications of generative AI in education and other domains, it is crucial to carefully consider the potential long-term consequences and the ethical dilemmas that may arise from widespread adoption.

Students' Voices on Generative AI: Perceptions, Benefits, and Challenges in Higher Education

This study explores university students' perceptions of generative AI (GenAI) technologies, such as ChatGPT, in higher education, focusing on familiarity, their willingness to engage, potential benefits and challenges, and effective integration. A survey of 399 undergraduate and postgraduate students from various disciplines in Hong Kong revealed a generally positive attitude towards GenAI in teaching and learning. Students recognized the potential for personalized learning support, writing and brainstorming assistance, and research and analysis capabilities. However, concerns about accuracy, privacy, ethical issues, and the impact on personal development, career prospects, and societal values were also expressed. According to John Biggs' 3P model, student perceptions significantly influence learning approaches and outcomes. By understanding students' perceptions, educators and policymakers can tailor GenAI technologies to address needs and concerns while promoting effective learning outcomes. Insights from this study can inform policy development around the integration of GenAI technologies into higher education. By understanding students' perceptions and addressing their concerns, policymakers can create well-informed guidelines and strategies for the responsible and effective implementation of GenAI tools, ultimately enhancing teaching and learning experiences in higher education.

A Comprehensive AI Policy Education Framework for University Teaching and Learning

This study aims to develop an AI education policy for higher education by examining the perceptions and implications of text generative AI technologies. Data was collected from 457 students and 180 teachers and staff across various disciplines in Hong Kong universities, using both quantitative and qualitative research methods. Based on the findings, the study proposes an AI Ecological Education Policy Framework to address the multifaceted implications of AI integration in university teaching and learning. This framework is organized into three dimensions: Pedagogical, Governance, and Operational. The Pedagogical dimension concentrates on using AI to improve teaching and learning outcomes, while the Governance dimension tackles issues related to privacy, security, and accountability. The Operational dimension addresses matters concerning infrastructure and training. The framework fosters a nuanced understanding of the implications of AI integration in academic settings, ensuring that stakeholders are aware of their responsibilities and can take appropriate actions accordingly.