Mixed-methods approach validates a framework for enhancing educational integrity and ethical AI use, suggesting proactive strategies for stakeholder engagement.
The rapid integration of artificial intelligence (AI) tools in educational settings has created unprecedented challenges for academic integrity, with studies indicating that 89% of students are familiar with ChatGPT and 43% have used AI tools for academic work, while current detection-based approaches have proven inadequate, achieving only 26% accuracy in identifying AI-generated content. This study develops and validates a comprehensive Human-Centered Design (HCD) framework for mitigating AI misuse in educational contexts, shifting from reactive detection strategies to proactive prevention-oriented approaches that prioritize stakeholder engagement and ethical AI integration. Using a two-phase mixed-methods approach combining Nominal Group Technique (NGT) and Fuzzy Delphi Method (FDM) with seven experts, the research achieved exceptional expert consensus with an overall average agreement of 98% across all evaluated components. Eleven core elements were validated and organized into five interconnected dimensions: Core Design Principles (emphasizing learner agency and educator empowerment), Implementation Strategies (featuring progressive disclosure and reflection mechanisms), Assessment & Feedback Systems (incorporating authentic assessment and ethical analytics), Stakeholder Engagement (encompassing co-design processes), and Ethical Safeguards (focusing on bias detection and privacy protection). Four components achieved perfect 100% expert consensus, while the low-lowest-ranked element maintained an acceptable defuzzification value of 0.800, well above the 0.5 threshold required for validation. The validated HCD framework provides a robust, empirically supported approach for educational institutions to proactively address AI misuse while maintaining the benefits of AI integration, offering a paradigm shift from punitive detection methods to collaborative, prevention-focused strategies that enhance rather than restrict educational AI applications, thereby contributing to the emerging fields of Human-Centered Learning Analytics (HCLA) and Human-Centered Artificial Intelligence (HCAI) with practical guidance for educational stakeholders seeking responsible AI integration strategies.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Mustapha et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: