Examining the use of ChatGPT in public universities in Hong Kong: A case study of restricted access areas
Open accessAbstract
Since late November 2022, generative AI ChatGPT has drawn waves of attention in society, and its impacts certainly extend to the higher education setting. Although ChatGPT has not been officially released for registration in Hong Kong, the higher education setting has been responding differently. The article conducted a systematic review of local newspapers published between 1 December 2022 and 31 July 2023 to analyse how the eight public universities in Hong Kong responded. This article divided the timeline into three phases: procrastination, remediation, and adaptation. Recommendations are given to universities for making policies and management based on the findings, including making timely but temporary announcements at the university level and updating course outlines that explicitly stated to what extent GenAI can be used in each course. This study used Hong Kong to serves as a reference for universities that are still struggling with the usage of ChatGPT and GenAI technologies in the restricted access areas.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Many universities initially adopted a cautious, wait-and-see approach following the public release of ChatGPT.
“Following the public release of ChatGPT, many universities initially adopted a cautious, wait-and-see approach (Wang, Dang, Wu and Mac, 2023; Moorhouse, Yeo and Wan, 2023; Cheng and YIM, 2024).”
From Generative AI in higher education: A global perspective of institutional adoption policies and guidelines (2025) · cites this paper as Cheng and YIM, 2024
The positive perception of GAI as a tool to enhance teaching and learning effectiveness indicated a strategic shift towards leveraging technology to meet educational objectives, highlighting its potential to complement and augment traditional teaching methodologies.
“The positive perception of GAI as a tool to enhance teaching and learning effectiveness indicated a strategic shift towards leveraging technology to meet educational objectives, highlighting its potential to complement and augment traditional teaching methodologies (Xiao et al., 2023; Cheng and YIM, 2024).”
From Generative AI in higher education: A global perspective of institutional adoption policies and guidelines (2025) · cites this paper as Cheng and YIM, 2024
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2012) · APA handbook of research methods in psychology, Vol 2: Research designs: Quantitative, qualitative, neuropsychological, and biological. · doi:10.1037/13620-004 · Cited by 10,299 · see citing works
ChatGPT for good? On opportunities and challenges of large language models for education
Kasneci, E., Sessler, K., Küchemann, S., Bannert, M., Dementieva, D., Fischer, F., Gasser, U., Groh, G., Günnemann, S., Hüllermeier, E., et al. (2023) · Learning and Individual Differences · doi:10.1016/j.lindif.2023.102274 · Cited by 7,326 · see citing works
Dwivedi, Y. K., Hughes, L., Ismagilova, E., Aarts, G., Coombs, C., Crick, T., Duan, Y., Dwivedi, R., Edwards, J., Eirug, A., et al. (2021) · International Journal of Information Management · doi:10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2019.08.002 · Cited by 4,611 · see citing works
Baidoo-Anu, D., & Owusu Ansah, L. (2023) · doi:10.2139/ssrn.4337484 · Cited by 3,004 · see citing works
Students' voices on generative ai: perceptions, benefits, and challenges in higher education
Chan, C. K. Y., & Hu, W. (2023) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2305.00290 · Cited by 2,504 · cited 1× · see citing works
“While educators hold divergent views about ChatGPT [56], a number of researchers have attempted to address the perspective of students [9, 44], teachers [10, 26] and the management educators [30, 35] when adopting ChatGPT in higher educational settings.”
ChatGPT: five priorities for research
van Dis, E. A. M., Bollen, J., Zuidema, W., van Rooij, R., & Bockting, C. L. (2023) · Nature · doi:10.1038/d41586-023-00288-7 · Cited by 1,842 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Several studies [27, 38, 50] also identified that there is an obvious gap in the literature regarding the real-world application and implications of ChatGPT in higher education.”
BAİDOO-ANU, D., & OWUSU ANSAH, L. (2023) · Journal of AI · doi:10.61969/jai.1337500 · Cited by 1,826 · see citing works
A comprehensive AI policy education framework for university teaching and learning
Chan, C. K. Y. (2023) · International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education · doi:10.1186/s41239-023-00408-3 · Cited by 1,577 · see citing works
ChatGPT is fun, but not an author
Thorp, H. H. (2023) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.adg7879 · Cited by 1,437 · see citing works
Lim, W. M., Gunasekara, A., Pallant, J. L., Pallant, J. I., & Pechenkina, E. (2023) · The International Journal of Management Education · doi:10.1016/j.ijme.2023.100790 · Cited by 1,261 · see citing works
Gao, C. A., Howard, F. M., Markov, N. S., Dyer, E. C., Ramesh, S., Luo, Y., & Pearson, A. T. (2022) · doi:10.1101/2022.12.23.521610 · Cited by 1,099 · cited 1× · see citing works
“…irresponsible uses of ChatGPT including cheating and plagiarism, that violate academic integrity are driving the decision to ban ChatGPT [30], Sullivan et al. [46] as well as the inclusion of AI output detectors to detect content generate by AI in editorial process under educational setting [19].”
Grassini, S. (2023) · Education Sciences · doi:10.3390/educsci13070692 · Cited by 1,048 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Previous studies [3, 20, 27, 34, 48], examined the benefits and threats posed by ChatGPT in the educational setting.”
The promises and challenges of artificial intelligence for teachers: A systematic review of research
Celik, I., Dindar, M., Muukkonen, H., & Järvelä, S. (2022) · TechTrends · doi:10.1007/s11528-022-00715-y · Cited by 984 · see citing works
ChatGPT in higher education: considerations for academic integrity and student learning
(2023) · Journal of Applied Learning & Teaching · doi:10.37074/jalt.2023.6.1.17 · Cited by 853 · cited 4× · see citing works
“Therefore it is paramount for universities to adapt and embrace it in a way that supports students’ learning and prepares them for the challenges in the AI-era future [46].”
InfluentialStrzelecki, A. (2024) · Interactive Learning Environments · doi:10.1080/10494820.2023.2209881 · Cited by 807 · see citing works
Chan, C. K. Y., & Lee, K. K. W. (2023) · Smart Learning Environments · doi:10.1186/s40561-023-00269-3 · Cited by 634 · see citing works
Unlocking the Power of ChatGPT: A Framework for Applying Generative AI in Education
Su (苏嘉红), J., & Yang (杨伟鹏), W. (2023) · ECNU Review of Education · doi:10.1177/20965311231168423 · Cited by 625 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Others have designed the educational framework for generative AI in education such as AI Ecological Education Policy Framework [8] and the IDEE Theoretical Framework [45].”
The role of ChatGPT in higher education: Benefits, challenges, and future research directions
(2023) · Journal of Applied Learning & Teaching · doi:10.37074/jalt.2023.6.1.29 · Cited by 561 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Previous studies [3, 20, 27, 34, 48], examined the benefits and threats posed by ChatGPT in the educational setting.”
AI bot ChatGPT writes smart essays — should professors worry?
Stokel-Walker, C. (2022) · Nature · doi:10.1038/d41586-022-04397-7 · Cited by 543 · see citing works
ChatGPT: The End of Online Exam Integrity?
Susnjak, T. (2022) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2212.09292 · Cited by 370 · cited 1× · see citing works
“While it has contributed to a paradigm shift in educational space [48], it also has the potential to significantly impact teaching and learning [4, 55], in addition to ethics, plagiarism, and academic integrity in higher education [38, 46, 47].”
Ryan, G. V., Callaghan, S., Rafferty, A., Higgins, M. F., Mangina, E., & McAuliffe, F. (2022) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/30082 · Cited by 242 · cited 1× · see citing works
“…has seen transformative technological impacts from technologies such as virtual reality, augmented reality [29], metaverse [31], blockchain [41], simulation learning [39], mobile technologies [1], robotics [2] and drones [42] as well as an online learning environment (Talan & Kalinkara, 2023).”
Better by You, better than Me? ChatGPT-3 as writing assistance in students’ essays.
Bašić, Ž., Banovac, A., Kružić, I., & Jerković, I. (2023) · doi:10.35542/osf.io/n5m7s · Cited by 189 · see citing works
OpenAI ChatGPT Generated Results: Similarity Index of Artificial Intelligence-Based Contents
Ventayen, R. J. M. (2023) · doi:10.2139/ssrn.4332664 · Cited by 123 · cited 1× · see citing works
“In the study conducted by Ventayen [52], the similarity index of ChatGPT-generated results was checked using Turnitin in Philippines.”
Xiao, P., Chen, Y., & Bao, W. (2023) · doi:10.2139/ssrn.4458269 · Cited by 93 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 19
- Al-Rahmi AM, Al-Rahmi WM, Alturki U, Aldraiweesh A, Almutairy S, Al-Adwan AS. Acceptance of mobile technologies and M-learning by university students: an empirical investigation in higher education. Educ Inf Technol. 2022;27(6):7805-26.
- Arocena I, Huegun-Burgos A, Rekalde-Rodriguez I. Robotics and education: a systematic review. TEM J. 2022;11(1):379-87.
- Choi, Jonathan H. and Hickman, Kristin E. and Monahan, Amy and Schwarcz, Daniel. ChatGPT Goes to Law School (January 23, 2023). 71 Journal of Legal Education 387 (2022). http:// dx. doi. org/ 10. 2139/ ssrn. 43359 05. · DOI
- Firat M. What ChatGPT means for universities: perceptions of scholars and students. J Appl Learn Teach. 2023;6(1):1-22.
- Huh S. Are ChatGPT's knowledge and interpretation ability comparable to those of medical students in Korea for taking a parasitol- ogy examination?: a descriptive study. J Educ Eval Health Prof. 2023. https:// doi. org/ 10. 3352/ jeehp. 2023. 20.1. · DOI · Paper page
- Kaplan-Rakowski R, Grotewold K, Hartwick P, Papin K. Generative AI and Teachers' perspectives on its implementation in education. J Interact Learn Res. 2023;34(2):313-38.
- Lampropoulos G, Keramopoulos E, Diamantaras K, Evangelidis G. Augmented reality and virtual reality in education: Public perspec- tives, sentiments, attitudes, and discourses. Education Sciences. 2022;12(11):798.
- Onggirawan CA, Kho JM, Kartiwa AP, Gunawan AA. Systematic literature review: The adaptation of distance learning process during the COVID-19 pandemic using virtual educational spaces in metaverse. Procedia Comp Sci. 2023;216:274-83.
- Qadir J. Engineering education in the era of ChatGPT Promise and pitfalls of generative AI for education. In 2023 IEEE Global Engi- neering Education Conference (EDUCON). IEEE. 2023. https:// doi. org/ 10. 3622/ techr xiv. 21789 434. · DOI
- Perkins M. Academic Integrity considerations of AI Large Language Models in the post-pandemic era: ChatGPT and beyond. J Univ Teach Learn Pract. 2023;20(2):07.
- Ratten V, Jones P. Generative artificial intelligence (ChatGPT): Implications for management educators. Int J Manag Educ. 2023;21(3): 100857.
- Rudolph J, Tan S, Tan S. ChatGPT: Bullshit spewer or the end of traditional assessments in higher education? J Appl Learn Teach. 2023;6(1):1-22.
- Savelyeva T, Park J. Blockchain technology for sustainable education. Br J Edu Technol. 2022;53(6):1591-604.
- Sivenas T, Koutromanos G. Exploring the Affordances of Drones from an Educational Perspective. IEEE. 2022. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1109/ ICALT 55010. 2022. 00035. · DOI
- Tajik E, Tajik F. A comprehensive examination of the potential application of Chat GPT in higher education institutions. TechRxiv: Preprint; 2023. https:// doi. org/ 10. 36227/ techr xiv. 22589 497. v1. · DOI
- Veletsianos G., Kimmons R., & Bondah F. ChatGPT and higher education: Initial prevalence and areas of interest. EDUCAUSE Review. 2023. Retrieved from https:// er. educa use. edu/ artic les/ 2023/3/ chatg pt-and-higher-educa tion-initi al-preva lence-and-areas-of-inter est. Accessed 15 Mar 2023.
- Weybrecht G. How management education is engaging students in the sustainable development goals. Int J Sustain High Educ. 2021;22(6):1302-15.
- Weybrecht G. Business schools are embracing the SDGs-But is it enough?-How business schools are reporting on their engagement in the SDGs. Int J Manag Educ. 2022;20(1): 100589.
- Whalen J, Mouza C. ChatGPT: challenges, opportunities, and implications for teacher education. Contemp Issues Technol Teacher Educ. 2023;23(1):1-23.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Jin, Y., Yan, L., Echeverria, V., Gašević, D., & Martinez-Maldonado, R. (2025) · Computers and Education Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1016/j.caeai.2024.100348 · Cited by 452 · see citing works
Large Language Model‐Based Chatbots in Higher Education
Yigci, D., Eryilmaz, M., Yetisen, A. K., Tasoglu, S., & Ozcan, A. (2025) · Advanced Intelligent Systems · doi:10.1002/aisy.202400429 · Cited by 113 · see citing works
Using ChatGPT for medical education: the technical perspective
Chan, K. Y., Yuen, T. H., & Co, M. (2025) · BMC Medical Education · doi:10.1186/s12909-025-06785-9 · Cited by 34 · see citing works
Generative AI and the future of connectivist learning in higher education
Liang, E. S., & Bai, S. (2025) · Journal of Asian Public Policy · doi:10.1080/17516234.2024.2386085 · Cited by 34 · see citing works
Pulari, S. R., & Jacob, S. G. (2025) · Procedia Computer Science · doi:10.1016/j.procs.2025.02.122 · Cited by 8 · see citing works
Navigating the Ethical and Societal Impacts of Generative AI in Higher Computing Education
Mak, J., Nakatumba-Nabende, J., Clear, T., Clear, A., Abluwi, I., Andrei, O., Angeli, L., MacNeil, S., Oyelere, S. S., Hale Rattigan, M., et al. (2025) · Proceedings of the 2025 Working Group Reports on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education · doi:10.1145/3760545.3783975 · Cited by 12 · see citing works
- Authors
- Cheng, M. W. T., & YIM, I. H. Y.
- Affiliations
- Lingnan University (HK)
- University of Cambridge (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Cheng, Michelle W. T.
- Venue
- Discover Education
- Published
- 2024-01-02
- Volume
- 3
- Issue
- 1
- ISSN
- 2731-5525 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4390509729
- Cited by
- 44
- References
- 24
- Citations by year
- 2026: 13 · 2025: 21 · 2024: 10
- FWCI
- 16.54
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Locations
- Discover Education (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Apollo (University of Cambridge) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Artificial Intelligence in Education
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Educational Innovations and Challenges
- Keywords
- ChatGPT, generative AI, higher education, public universities, Hong Kong universities, AI policy, course syllabus, academic integrity, media coverage
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
