Semi-systematic literature review reveals scarce empirical evaluation of artificial intelligence readiness in higher education, highlighting the necessity of a balanced socio-technical approach.
The application of Artificial Intelligence in Education (AIED) is experiencing widespread interest among students, educators, researchers, and policymakers. AIED is expected, among other things, to enhance learning environments in the higher education system. However, in line with the general trends, there are also increasing concerns about possible negative and collateral effects. The consequent social impact cannot be currently assessed in depth. Balancing benefits with social considerations according to a socio-technical approach is essential for harnessing the true power of AI in a responsible and trustworthy context. This study proposes a semi-systematic literature review of the available knowledge on the adoption of artificial intelligence (AI) in the higher education system. It presents a stakeholder-centric analysis to explore multiple perspectives, including pedagogical, managerial, technological, governmental, external, and social ones. The main goal is to identify and discuss major gaps and challenges in context, looking at the existing body of knowledge and momentum. AIED should encompass pedagogical, ethical, and social dimensions to be properly addressed. This review highlights a not-always-explicit socio-technical perspective. Additionally, this study reveals a significant lack of empirical systematic evaluation of added value and institutional readiness. Because of the broad scope of the study and the intense ongoing debate on the topic, an exhaustive identification of the current body of knowledge is probably unrealistic, so this study aims mainly to identify the mainstream and major trends by looking at the most recent contributions.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Alshahrani et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: