Students’ Positions towards Generative AI Technologies: Strengths and Challenges in Higher Education

The current study examined the attitudes of Arab students toward generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) in higher education, focusing on their self-reported awareness of its limitations and risks, readiness to use these technologies, concerns, and recommendations for effective integration into teaching and learning. The study employed a mixed-methods design involving 337 undergraduate and postgraduate students from a teacher education college in Israel, recruited through convenience sampling. Data were collected using an online questionnaire comprising closed-ended and open-ended questions. Quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, correlation analysis, and independent-samples t-tests, while qualitative responses were analyzed thematically. The findings revealed an overall mean of 2.91 (SD = 0.783) for students’ self-reported awareness of GenAI limitations and risks and a mean of 3.53 (SD = 0.865) for readiness to use these technologies. Readiness was positively correlated with previous use (r = 0.408, p < 0.001), but not significantly correlated with self-reported familiarity (r = 0.031, p = 0.571). Male students reported significantly higher readiness than female students, t(335) = 2.326, p = 0.021, whereas no significant difference was found by academic level. Students’ concerns had an overall mean of 3.06 (SD = 0.872), with the potential negative effects of overreliance on generic skills emerging as the highest-rated concern. Concerns did not differ significantly by previous-use group, gender, or academic level. The qualitative findings showed that students recommended using GenAI to support research and academic tasks, integrating it into courses and learning activities, verifying the accuracy of generated information, and providing appropriate training and instructor guidance. The findings highlight the importance of a balanced and responsible approach to GenAI integration that combines practical support with critical evaluation, academic integrity, and the preservation of independent thinking.