The findings suggest that faculty and staff discourse shifted from primarily containing GenAI-related risks toward selectively integrating the technology into teaching and professional practice, and strategies for balancing innovation, integrity, equity, and the human purposes of higher education are identified.
Abstract
The rapid diffusion of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) tools such as ChatGPT has unsettled established academic practices related to assessment, authorship, integrity, and disciplinary knowledge production. This qualitative repeated cross-sectional study examines how faculty and staff at a large public research university understood these changes in 2023 and 2024. The analysis draws on responses to the same open-ended survey question collected from independent respondent groups in 2023 (n = 104) and 2024 (n = 313). Responses were analyzed inductively through thematic analysis and subsequently interpreted using Disruptive Innovation Theory and Complex Adaptive Systems Theory. The analysis identified both continuity and change across the two datasets. Responses in 2023 emphasized uncertainty, threats to academic integrity, and defensive assessment redesign. Responses in 2024 more frequently described pedagogical experimentation, process-oriented assessment, and AI literacy as emerging academic and professional competencies. Concerns about authorship, equity, reliability, and inconsistent institutional guidance persisted across both years. The findings suggest that faculty and staff discourse shifted from primarily containing GenAI-related risks toward selectively integrating the technology into teaching and professional practice. However, because the study used independent cross-sectional samples, it does not establish individual change over time. The study contributes a theoretically informed account of institutional sensemaking during the first two years following ChatGPT’s public release and identifies strategies for balancing innovation, integrity, equity, and the human purposes of higher education.
GenAI is already embedded in students’ study practices, but that its use is largely self-directed rather than strongly shaped by institutional context, which highlights the need for pedagogical and institutional strategies that support critical, reflective, and responsible use.
Å. Nygren, Anna-Li Eriksson, Jeanette Sjöberg et al.· Education and Information Te...· 2 citations
Examination of faculty burnout associated with AI adoption and academic integrity enforcement in Dhaka, Bangladesh supports the need for written institutional AI policies, formal recognition of assessment redesign labor, fair and reliable misconduct procedures, and sustained professional development so that integrity e...
Ridwan Islam Sifat, Mohaimenul Islam Jowarder, Rafiul Azim Jowarder et al.· New solutions : a journal of...· 0 citations
It is concluded that in order for undergraduate education to continue to be relevant in a society where AI is pervasive, governance must change toward process-oriented evaluation and relational originality.
Joe Mutebi, Brian Mugisha, Ibrahim Adabara et al.· F1000Research· 0 citations
It is argued that detection-centred enforcement is a structurally weak control and proposed instead a layered institutional framework in which policy and governance, pedagogy and assessment redesign, and technology-based assurance operate as mutually reinforcing controls, sustained by a continuous audit and improvement...
Dr. G. Purushothaman, Dr. S. Ganapathy, Mr. Saurabh Jaiswal, Mr. Thanga Kumaran M· International Journal of Adv...· 0 citations
First-year university students’ perceptions of generative AI in academic work are investigated, foregrounding student agency in a Global South context and offering pedagogical and policy implications for responsible AI adoption.
Sharifuzzaman, M. Rahman· Asian Journal of Contemporar...· 0 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.