Search

Faculty perspectives on the use of artificial intelligence (AI) in higher education are crucial for AI's meaningful integration into teaching and learning, yet research is scarce. This paper presents a study designed to gain insight into faculty members' (N = 122) AI self-efficacy and distinct latent profiles, perceived benefits, challenges, use, and professional development needs related to AI. The respondents saw greater equity in education as AI's greatest benefit, while students and faculty members' lack of AI literacy was among the greatest challenges, with the majority interested in professional development. Latent class analysis revealed four distinct faculty member profiles: optimistic, critical, critically reflected, and neutral. The optimistic profile moderates the relationship between self-efficacy and usage. The development of adequate support services is suggested for successful and sustainable digital transformation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Peer feedback literacy is becoming increasingly important in higher education as peer feedback has substantially grown as a pedagogical approach. However, quality of produced feedback, a key behavioral aspect of peer feedback literacy, lacks a systematic and evidence-based conceptualization to guide research, instruction, and system design. We introduce a novel framework involving six conceptual dimensions of peer feedback quality that can be measured and supported in online peer feedback contexts: reviewing process, rating accuracy, feedback amount, perceived comment quality, actual comment quality, and feedback content. We then test the underlying dimensionality of student competencies through correlational analysis, Multidimensional Scaling, and cluster analysis, using data from 844 students engaged in online peer feedback in a university-level course. The separability of the conceptual dimensions is largely supported in the cluster analysis. However, the cluster analysis also suggests restructuring perceived and actual comment quality in terms of initial impact and ultimate impact. The Multi-Dimensional Scaling suggests the dimensions of peer feedback can be conceptualized in terms of relative emphasis on expertise vs. effort and on overall review quality vs. individual comment quality. The findings provide a new road map for meta-analyses, empirical studies, and system design work focused on peer feedback literacy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Peer feedback is introduced as an effective learning strategy, especially in largesize classes where teachers face high workloads. However, for complex tasks such as writing an argumentative essay, without support peers may not provide highquality feedback since it requires a high level of cognitive processing, critical thinking skills, and a deep understanding of the subject. With the promising developments in Artificial Intelligence (AI), particularly after the emergence of ChatGPT, there is a global argument that whether AI tools can be seen as a new source of feedback or not for complex tasks. The answer to this question is not completely clear yet as there are limited studies and our understanding remains constrained. In this study, we used ChatGPT as a source of feedback for students' argumentative essay writing tasks and we compared the quality of ChatGPT-generated feedback with peer feedback. The participant pool consisted of 74 graduate students from a Dutch university. The study unfolded in two phases: firstly, students' essay data were collected as they composed essays on one of the given topics; subsequently, peer feedback and ChatGPT-generated feedback data were collected through engaging peers in a feedback process and using ChatGPT as a feedback source. Two coding schemes including coding schemes for essay analysis and coding schemes for feedback analysis were used to measure the quality of essays and feedback. Then, a MANOVA analysis was employed to determine any distinctions between the feedback generated by peers and ChatGPT. Additionally, Spearman's correlation was utilized to explore potential links between the essay quality and the feedback generated by peers and ChatGPT. The results showed a significant difference between feedback generated by ChatGPT and peers. While ChatGPT provided more descriptive feedback including information about how the essay is written, peers provided feedback including information about identification of the problem in the essay. The overarching look at the results suggests a potential complementary role for ChatGPT and students in the feedback process. Regarding the relationship between the quality of essays and the quality of the feedback provided by ChatGPT and peers, we found no overall significant relationship. These findings imply that the quality of the essays does not impact both ChatGPT and peer feedback quality. The implications of this study are valuable, shedding light on the prospective use of ChatGPT as a feedback source, particularly for complex tasks like argumentative essay writing. We discussed the findings and delved into the implications for future research and practical applications in educational contexts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although the field of Artificial Intelligence in Education (AIEd) has a substantial history as a research domain, never before has the rapid evolution of AI applications in education sparked such prominent public discourse. Given the already rapidly growing AIEd literature base in higher education, now is the time to ensure that the field has a solid research and conceptual grounding. This review of reviews is the first comprehensive meta review to explore the scope and nature of AIEd in higher education (AIHEd) research, by synthesising secondary research (e.g., systematic reviews), indexed in the Web of Science, Scopus, ERIC, EBSCOHost, IEEE Xplore, ScienceDirect and ACM Digital Library, or captured through snowballing in OpenAlex, ResearchGate and Google Scholar. Reviews were included if they synthesised applications of AI solely in formal higher or continuing education, were published in English between 2018 and July 2023, were journal articles or full conference papers, and if they had a method section 66 publications were included for data extraction and synthesis in EPPI Reviewer, which were predominantly systematic reviews (66.7%), published by authors from North America (27.3%), conducted in teams (89.4%) in mostly domestic-only collaborations (71.2%). Findings show that these reviews mostly focused on AIHEd generally (47.0%) or Profiling and Prediction (28.8%) as thematic foci, however key findings indicated a predominance of the use of Adaptive Systems and Personalisation in higher education. Research gaps identified suggest a need for greater ethical, methodological, and contextual considerations within future research, alongside interdisciplinary approaches to AIHEd application. Suggestions are provided to guide future primary and secondary research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Online collaborative learning is implemented extensively in higher education. Nevertheless, it remains challenging to help learners achieve high-level group performance, knowledge elaboration, and socially shared regulation in online collaborative learning. To cope with these challenges, this study proposes and evaluates a novel automated assessment and feedback approach that is based on knowledge graph and artificial intelligence technologies. Following a quasi-experimental design, we assigned a total of 108 college students into two conditions: an experimental group that participated in online collaborative learning and received automated assessment and feedback from the tool, and a control group that participated in the same collaborative learning activities without automated assessment and feedback. Analyses of quantitative and qualitative data indicated that the introduced automated assessment and feedback significantly promoted group performance, knowledge elaboration, and socially shared regulation of collaborative learning. The proposed knowledge graph-based automated assessment and feedback approach shows promise in providing a valuable tool for researchers and practitioners to support online collaborative learning. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. Highlights: Proposed AI Ecological Education Policy Framework for university teaching and learning. Three dimensions: Pedagogical, Governance, and Operational AI Policy Framework. Qualitative and quantitative data collected from students, teachers, and staff. Ten key areas identified for planning an AI policy in universities. Students should play an active role in drafting and implementing the policy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As a cutting-edge field of artificial intelligence in education (AIEd) that depends on advanced computing technologies, AI performance prediction model is widely used to identify at-risk students that tend to fail, establish student-centered learning pathways, and optimize instructional design and development. A majority of the existing AI prediction models focus on the development and optimization of the accuracy of AI algorithms rather than applying AI models to provide student with in-time and continuous feedback and improve the students' learning quality. To fill this gap, this research integrated an AI performance prediction model with learning analytics approaches with a goal to improve student learning effects in a collaborative learning context. Quasi-experimental research was conducted in an online engineering course to examine the differences of students' collaborative learning effect with and without the support of the integrated approach. Results showed that the integrated approach increased student engagement, improved collaborative learning performances, and strengthen student satisfactions about learning. This research made contributions to proposing an integrated approach of AI models and learning analytics (LA) feedback and providing paradigmatic implications for future development of AI-driven learning analytics. Highlights: Integrated approach was used to combine AI with learning analytics (LA) feedback Quasi-experiment research was conducted to investigate student learning effects Integrated approach to foster student engagement, performances and satisfactions Paradigmatic implication was proposed for develop AI-driven learning analytics Closed loop was established for both AI model development and educational application. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]