Exploring University Staff’s Perceptions of Using Generative Artificial Intelligence at University
Abstract
:1. Introduction
- What are the perspectives of higher education teaching staff on students’ use of ChatGPT in academic settings as expressed on the social media platform, X?
- What approaches do higher education teaching staff propose for the appropriate use of ChatGPT by students in academic practices?
2. Methods
2.1. Study Design
2.2. Researcher Positionality
2.3. Eligibility Criteria
2.4. Search Strategy
2.5. Selection Process
2.6. Data Collection and Data Items
2.7. Data Analysis
3. Results
3.1. Perceptions of GenAI Impact on Higher Education and Scepticism Towards Its Management
3.1.1. Profession Threat
“Well ChatGPT just replaced university professor’s, and also replaced university itself. #liberalarts #university #AI #ChatGPT #artificalintelligence”
“Higher education is going to be hilarious. For most part: ChatGPT generated assignments, ChatGPT generated submissions, ChatGPT generated grading. Timepass maximum.”
“Really depressing how many people in higher education are saying things like we need to “work with” stuff like ChatGPT—how f***ing silly and naive can you get. It’s a computer program, not God”
“So if is not accurate, knowledgeable or “intelligent” I don’t understand why so many institutions (universities, research centers, ministries, etc.) and as well individuals (researchers, teachers, etc.) are discussing chatGPT and pedagogy and how to integrate it in education. Why?”
“Talking to my 11yo about #chatGPT last night and reasons why I didn’t think he should use it. … Wondering whether my concerns come from an academic perspective or just from my lack of understanding. I think I need to increase my knowledge in order to support him with it’s potential.”
3.1.2. GenAI’s Learning Impact
“According to this guy’s argument, any chatgpt essay on the topic would be a perfect dissertation.”
“Hot Take. if you need ChatGPT or any other “fake” “A.I.” to write your papers, you need to drop out of University. It’s not for you. Leave higher education to those who actually want to think.”
“Take this from someone who has spent almost $100k on ‘higher education’… Unless you want to be a doctor or a lawyer or something that demands a specific degree, you are MUCH better off with self-education. Use #youtube #chatgpt #books #mentors to learn.”
“[I]t is crucial to use ChatGPT ethically and responsibly, ensuring that it serves as a facilitator for learning rather than a replacement for critical thinking or a means to simply boost efficiency.” #Academia #AcademicChatter #epitwitter #AcademicTwitter
3.1.3. Institutional Trust and Response
“[university] President claims that ChatGPT ‘may be one of the best things to happen to Universities in a long time...’ ChatGPT is now banned on [institution name] University wifi.”
“I think universities need to be taking a serious look at their current assessment models because I don’t think they are sustainable in a world with ChatGPT. Unfortunately I don’t see many signs they are doing the hard thinking necessary.”
“As fast at #AI is evolving, #university can’t just sit and watch https://smpl.is/6xles #Technology #computers #GoogleBard #ChatGPT @timeshighered”
“Yes, #ChatGPT/generative #AI is impacting universities. But debates are super insular (at least in the US and Germany). How are these conversations taking shape in other parts of the world? Eager for your insights. #High-erEd @OpenAcademics @AcademicChatter @GlobalYAcademy”
“Why are so many universities taking a ““wait-and-see”” approach with ChatGPT? It’s time already to come up with guidelines. #education #ai #university #students”
3.2. GenAI in Assessment: Prevention and Detection Approaches
3.2.1. Reactive Assessment Approaches
“I had my first experience with #ChatGPT cheating in my intro stats class. This program is wild and will definitely have huge implications for #HigherEd. Cheating just leveled up in a big big way.”
“As we ease into finals, how is AI (ChatGPT) showing up in student work and how are schools/educators approaching it? I’m having a hard time navigating it as a powerful tool and also what it means for me to evaluate “student” work submitted in this way? #AcademicTwitter”
“AI chatbots and academic ethics is one of the hottest topics in #highered and #edtech. Here’s an article that you might find useful! Chatting and cheat-ing: Ensuring academic integrity in the era of ChatGPT”
“University educators: how are you dealing with Chat GPT in your first year classes? What kinds of assignments are you creating? How are you adjusting your teaching?”
“I don’t understand why Universities don’t just switch to in person tests and use at home assignments as a voluntary exercise. That way, there’d be little incentive to cheat—you cannot use ChatGPT during the exam…”
“Universities are freaking out over the use of chatGPT. In reality, this highlights the fact that most work is “busy work” and doesn’t incentivize critical thought.”
3.2.2. Debating GenAI Detection
“Too right we have access to tools to determine students’ own-words from copied ideas without citations, proper acknowledgements in their written assignments. #HigherEd #plagiarism #ChatGPT #AI”
“You can now bypass the AI detecting tools used by schools and universi-ties. I feel sorry for teachers and lecturers having to face this challenge. #AI #ChatGPT #homework”
“How do you handle situations where you strongly suspect students are using ChatGPT to write their papers? Is there a way to check this, like a http://TurnItIn.com but for ChatGPT? #AcademicTwitter”
“And of course, when it comes to addressing ChatGPT in higher education, there are other things we can do apart from detection!”
“Another chance to point out that students (collectively) are not out to cheat the system. #HigherEducation #ChatGPT #AIinED @UBC”
3.3. Future-Focused Approaches to GenAI-Enhanced Learning and Assessment
3.3.1. Future Perspectives
“How can the curriculum embrace AI and new technology https://theeducatoronline.com/k12/news/how-the-curriculum-can-embrace-ai-and new-technology/282635 #onlinelearning #onlineexam #onlineproctoring #chatbot #automation #digitallearning #education #students #universities #high-ereducation #AI #chatgpt #chatbot #automation”
“Educators should not give into the moral panic surrounding generative #AI. Instead, they should view #ChatGPT and other models as an opportunity to innovate the field of higher education…”
“#Universities that #ban #ChatGPT may be #hurting their own admissions, according to a #study https://titas.massblog.xyz/universities-that-ban-chatgpt-may-be-hurting-their-own-admissions-according-to-a-study/?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=ReviveOldPost #admissions”
“Is #ChatGPT here to stay in higher education? College instructors are becoming dependent on ChatGPT, using it to plan lessons and give feedback to students about their work. These instructors perceive ChatGPT, as their students likely do, as a timesaver.”
“Idea for ChatGPT: Train it on all of the syllabus at a university to create a virtual counselor for basic course questions.”
- Find relevant courses from queries
- Suggest plans for completing a degree
- Provide information on deadlines
- Help with enrollment process”
“Are educators using ChatGPT to write lesson plans? https://ecampusnews.com/teaching-learning/2023/05/26/are-educators-using-chatgpt-to-write-lesson-plans/ #edtech #edchat #AI #highered”
3.3.2. GenAI Integration and Learning Optimization
“It’s really funny to watch schools and universities banning ChatGPT; they rather have kids memorize information that’s a commodity than start people teaching critical thinking of inputting into AI products.”
“to avoid reactionary response, education systems should update digital literacy programs and include AI literacy. #AI #ChatGPT #Artificial-Intelligence #educacion #universities #schools.”
“#AcademicTwitter #AcademicChatter looking forward to fall semester, I’m wondering if anyone has thought of creative ways to use #ChatGPT for good instead of evil? ie how can we see it as a useful tool in our classrooms instead of something to panic about?”
“Using AI to make teaching easier and more impactful: five strategies and prompts that work By @emollick “Despite decades of hype from VCR classes to Massive Online Courses, technology has not replaced teaching.”
“https://open.substack.com/pub/oneusefulthing/p/using-ai-to-make-teachingeasier?r=j7gb2&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web #AI #ChatGPT #edtech #highered #education”
“#ChatGPT aside, this approach could be beneficial for #teaching stages of #writing, including drafting, editing, rewriting, etc! Allowing #students to see our own drafts in this way might also demystifying the writing pro-cess! #teachertwitter #highereducation #ELT”
“At [institution name] University, we are trying to instill similar under-standing about the responsible use of ChatGPT. This may need new teaching and learning philosophy with less write ups and more discussions. Will take sometime for teachers who resist new ideas, but it needs to change.”
“I wonder how many hours those of us who teach at universities have sunk into our new roles as ChatGPT Sherlock Holmeses.”
3.3.3. Guidance and Policy Development
“Any colleges/universities writing a policy for how ChatGPT may be used by students? Or is your department doing so? Or are we all going rogue with our expectations? #AcademicChatter”
“Love the “find the biases” suggestion! “How can we guide our students to not only recognize these blind spots but also incorporate a greater multiplicity of viewpoints in their scholarship?” #chatgpt #edutwitter #edchat #educoachchat #educoach #highered”
“Would love to hear accounts from professors, educators, and students about your university’s response or lack thereof to ChatGPT/AI text-generation technology in coursework: how students have been using it already, how you’ve been trying to respond, etc. DMs open!”
4. Discussion
4.1. Strengths and Limitations
4.2. Recommendations for Policy and Practice
4.3. Future Research
4.4. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Acar, O. A. 2023 June 15. Are your students ready for AI? A 4-Step framework to prepare learners for a ChatGPT world. Harvard Business Publishing. Available online: https://hbsp.harvard.edu/inspiring-minds/are-your-students-ready-for-ai (accessed on 10 March 2025).
- Amani, S., White, L., Balart, T., Arora, L., Shryock, K. J., Brumbelow, K., & Watson, K. L. (2023). Generative AI perceptions: A survey to measure the perceptions of faculty, staff, and students on generative AI tools in academia. arXiv, arXiv:2304.14415. [Google Scholar]
- Baidoo-Anu, D., & Ansah, L. O. (2023). Education in the era of generative artificial intelligence (AI): Understanding the potential benefits of ChatGPT in promoting teaching and learning. SSRN Electronic Journal, 7(1), 52–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bessen, J. E. (2017). AI and jobs: The role of demand. National Bureau of Economic Research. Available online: https://www.nber.org/papers/w24235 (accessed on 10 March 2025).
- Budhwar, P., Chowdhury, S., Wood, G., Aguinis, H., Bamber, G. J., Beltran, J. R., Boselie, P., Lee Cooke, F., Decker, S., DeNisi, A., Dey, P. K., Guest, D., Knoblich, A. J., Malik, A., Paauwe, J., Papagiannidis, S., Patel, C., Pereira, V., Ren, S., … Varma, A. (2023). Human resource management in the age of generative artificial intelligence: Perspectives and research directions on ChatGPT. Human Resource Management Journal, 33(3), 606–659. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cassidy, C. (2023, January 16). Lecturer detects bot use in one-fifth of assessments as concerns mount over AI in exams. The Guardian. Available online: https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/jan/17/lecturer-detects-bot-use-in-one-fifth-of-assessments-as-concerns-mount-over-ai-in-exams (accessed on 10 March 2025).
- Chan, C. K. Y., & Tsi, L. H. Y. (2023). The AI revolution in education: Will AI replace or assist teachers in higher education? arXiv, arXiv:2305.01185. [Google Scholar]
- Chiu, T. K. F. (2023). The impact of Generative AI (GenAI) on practices, policies and research direction in education: A case of ChatGPT and Midjourney. Interactive Learning Environments, 32(10), 6187–6203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chiu, T. K. F., Xia, Q., Zhou, X., Chai, C. S., & Cheng, M. (2023). Systematic literature review on opportunities, challenges, and future research recommendations of artificial intelligence in education. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 4, 100118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Daniel, B. (2015). Big Data and analytics in higher education: Opportunities and challenges: The value of big data in higher education. British Journal of Educational Technology: Journal of the Council for Educational Technology, 46(5), 904–920. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dhamija, A., & Dhamija, D. (2024). Understanding teachers’ perspectives on ChatGPT-generated assignments in higher education. Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies in Education, 14(1), 38–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dibble, M. 2023 February 10. Schools ban ChatGPT amid fears of artificial intelligence-assisted cheating. Voice of American News. Available online: https://www.voanews.com/a/schools-ban-chatgpt-amid-fears-of-artificial-intelligence-assisted-cheating-/6958125.html (accessed on 10 March 2025).
- Diddi, P. (2015). Organizational twitter use: A qualitative analysis of tweets during breast cancer awareness month. Louisiana State University and Agricultural & Mechanical College. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dobrin, S. I. (2023). Talking about generative AI: A guide for educators (1st ed.). Broadview Press. Available online: https://broadviewpress.com/product/talking-generative-ai/#tab-description (accessed on 10 March 2025).
- Firat, M. (2023). What ChatGPT means for universities: Perceptions of scholars and students. Journal of Applied Learning & Teaching, 6(1), 57–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fu, J., Li, C., Zhou, C., Li, W., Lai, J., Deng, S., Zhang, Y., Guo, Z., & Wu, Y. (2023). Methods for analyzing the contents of social media for health care: Scoping review. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 25, e43349. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fui-Hoon Nah, F., Zheng, R., Cai, J., Siau, K., & Chen, L. (2023). Generative AI and ChatGPT: Applications, challenges, and AI-human collaboration. Journal of Information Technology Case and Application Research, 25(3), 277–304. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hadi Mogavi, R., Zhao, Y., Ul Haq, E., Hui, P., & Ma, X. (2021, June 22–25). Student barriers to active learning in synchronous online classes: Characterization, reflections, and suggestions. Eighth ACM Conference on Learning @ Scale, Virtual Event, Germany. [Google Scholar]
- Iqbal, N., Ahmed, H., & Azhar, K. A. (2022). Exploring teachers’ attitudes towards using ChatGPT. Global Journal for Management and Administrative Sciences, 3(4), 97–111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jordan, K., & Weller, M. (2018). Academics and social networking sites: Benefits, problems and tensions in professional engagement with online networking. Journal of Interactive Media in Education, 2018(1–9), 1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kelly, A., Sullivan, M., & Strampel, K. (2023). Generative artificial intelligence: University student awareness, experience, and confidence in use across disciplines. Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice, 20(6), 1–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kohnke, L., Moorhouse, B. L., & Zou, D. (2023). Exploring generative artificial intelligence preparedness among university language instructors: A case study. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 5, 100156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lo, C. K. (2023). What is the impact of ChatGPT on education? A rapid review of the literature. Education Sciences, 13(4), 410. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- McHugh, M. L. (2012). Interrater reliability: The kappa statistic. Biochemia Medica, 22(3), 276–282. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Muranga, K., Muse, I. S., Köroğlu, E. N., & Yildirim, Y. (2023). Artificial Intelligence and underfunded education. London Journal of Social Sciences, 6, 56–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Petricini, T., Wu, C., & Zipf, S. T. (2023). Perceptions about generative AI and ChatGPT use by faculty and college students. Transformative Dialogues: Teaching and Learning Journal, 17(2), 1–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rajabi, P., Taghipour, P., Cukierman, D., & Doleck, T. (2023, May 4–5). Exploring ChatGPT’s impact on post-secondary education: A qualitative study. 25th Western Canadian Conference on Computing Education, Vancouver, BC, Canada. [Google Scholar]
- Sleigh, J., Amann, J., Schneider, M., & Vayena, E. (2021). Qualitative analysis of visual risk communication on twitter during the Covid-19 pandemic. BMC Public Health, 21(1), 810. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Smolansky, A., Cram, A., Raduescu, C., Zeivots, S., Huber, E., & Kizilcec, R. F. (2023, July 20–22). Educator and student perspectives on the impact of generative AI on assessments in higher education. Tenth ACM Conference on Learning @ Scale, Copenhagen, Denmark. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Stepanechko, O., & Kozub, L. (2023). English teachers’ concerns about the ethical use of ChatGPT by university students. Grail of Science. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sullivan, M., Kelly, A., & McLaughlan, P. (2023). ChatGPT in higher education: Considerations for academic integrity and student learning. Journal of Applied Learning & Teaching, 6(1), 31–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Talan, T., & Kalınkara, Y. (2023). The role of artificial intelligence in higher education: ChatGPT assessment for anatomy course. International Journal of Management Information Systems and Computer Science, 7(1), 33–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Talbot, A., Ford, T., Ryan, S., Mahtani, K. R., & Albury, C. (2023). #TreatmentResistantDepression: A qualitative content analysis of Tweets about difficult-to-treat depression. Health Expectations, 26(5), 1986–1996. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Upsher, R., Heard, C., Yalcintas, S., Pearson, J., & Findon, J. L. (2024). Embracing generative AI in authentic assessment; challenges, ethics and opportunities. In S. Beckingham, J. Lawrence, S. Powell, & P. Hartley (Eds.), Using generative AI effectively in higher education. Routledge Member of the Taylor and Francis Group. [Google Scholar]
- Veletsianos, G. (2012). Higher education scholars’ participation and practices on Twitter: Scholars’ participation and practices on Twitter. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 28(4), 336–349. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wilkinson, C., Oppert, M., & Owen, M. (2024). Investigating academics’ attitudes towards ChatGPT: A qualitative study. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 40(4), 105–120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Williams, S. A., Terras, M. M., & Warwick, C. (2013). What people study when they study Twitter: Classifying Twitter related academic papers. Journal of Documentation, 69(3), 384–410. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wu, T., He, S., Liu, J., Sun, S., Liu, K., Han, Q.-L., & Tang, Y. (2023). A brief overview of ChatGPT: The history, status quo and potential future development. IEEE/CAA Journal of Automatica Sinica, 10(5), 1122–1136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- X. (2023). X API pricing. X. Available online: https://developer.x.com/en/pricingX (accessed on 10 March 2025).
- X. (2024a). Developer agreement and policy. Available online: https://developer.x.com/en/developer-terms/agreement-and-policy (accessed on 10 March 2025).
- X. (2024b). X terms of service. X.Com. twitter-com. Available online: https://x.com/en/tos (accessed on 10 March 2025).
Themes | Sub-Themes | Frequency (Number of Posts) |
---|---|---|
Perceptions of GenAI’s Impact on Higher Education and Skepticism towards its Management | a. Profession threat | 22 |
b. GenAI’s learning impact | 21 | |
c. Institutional trust and response | 22 | |
GenAI in Assessment: Prevention and Detection Approaches | a. Reactive assessment approaches | 16 |
b. Debating GenAI detection | 30 | |
Future-Focused Approaches to GenAI-Enhanced Learning and Assessment | a. Future perspectives | 27 |
b. GenAI integration and learning optimization | 31 | |
c. Guidance and policy development | 25 |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2025 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Whitbread, M.; Hayes, C.; Prabhakar, S.; Upsher, R. Exploring University Staff’s Perceptions of Using Generative Artificial Intelligence at University. Educ. Sci. 2025, 15, 367. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15030367
Whitbread M, Hayes C, Prabhakar S, Upsher R. Exploring University Staff’s Perceptions of Using Generative Artificial Intelligence at University. Education Sciences. 2025; 15(3):367. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15030367
Chicago/Turabian StyleWhitbread, Molly, Chloe Hayes, Sanjana Prabhakar, and Rebecca Upsher. 2025. "Exploring University Staff’s Perceptions of Using Generative Artificial Intelligence at University" Education Sciences 15, no. 3: 367. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15030367
APA StyleWhitbread, M., Hayes, C., Prabhakar, S., & Upsher, R. (2025). Exploring University Staff’s Perceptions of Using Generative Artificial Intelligence at University. Education Sciences, 15(3), 367. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15030367