The rapid emergence of generative artificial intelligence (genAI) has transformed nearly every sector, with education experiencing particularly widespread and complex changes. From lesson planning to essay writing, genAI tools are now embedded in students and educators daily practices. While existing research has explored educational outcomes and pedagogical strategies, there remains a critical gap in understanding how key stakeholders- students, teachers, and industry professionals- perceive this technology and what implications these views may hold for implementation. Many prior studies have been limited by narrow participant pools (e.g., focusing only on students), short-term survey-based methods, or exclusion of broader social and professional perspectives, making it difficult to formulate responsive and inclusive policy frameworks. To address these limitations, the present study employed a qualitative, interview-based methodology to examine the perspectives of 27 students, 7 industry professionals, and 2 teachers. Through inductive thematic analysis, the study surfaced both shared and group-specific concerns and aspirations. Findings reveal that participants widely view genAI as a powerful learning and productivity tool, yet express concern about academic dishonesty, overreliance, and diminished critical thinking. All groups emphasized the need for ethical guidelines and skill development frameworks. These findings are important because they foreground the lived experiences of multiple educational stakeholders, revealing that responsible integration of genAI must be collaborative, equity-driven, and responsive to both educational and workforce needs.
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Vivian Sheng
Lecture Notes in Education Psychology and Public Media
Sacred Heart Seminary and School of Theology
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Vivian Sheng (Tue,) studied this question.
www.synapsesocial.com/papers/68f04918e559138a1a06d4b3 — DOI: https://doi.org/10.54254/2753-7048/2025.ns27763
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: