Generative AI: Is it a paradigm shift for higher education
Open accessAbstract
In this special issue, we explore the opportunities and challenges of using Generative AI (GenAI), in particular, text generators in higher education learning and teaching. As GenAI has become increasingly popular with many staff and students, this special issue provides an overview of the current state of the field and offers insights into future research. This introduction paper consists of four parts. It begins by providing an overview of AI and Generative AI, identifying the gap and framing the special issue relating to the gaps. The second part explores the opportunities and challenges of GenAI in higher education, as identified in the literature. The third part provides an overview of the papers included in the special issue. The final part is the self-reflection of the lead author. The special issue aims to serve as a valuable resource for higher education stakeholders, such as students, practitioners, researchers and managers. We hope this collection will help advance knowledge and future research, encourage innovation and inform evidence-based policy and practices in the field of Generative AI in higher education.
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?
Contextual and institutional variables, such as faculty attitudes toward AI, digital infrastructure, and curricular autonomy, mediate how technology adoption unfolds.
“Contextual and institutional variables, such as faculty attitudes toward AI, digital infrastructure, and curricular autonomy, are known to mediate how technology adoption unfolds (O'Dea, 2024).”
From Generative AI in Design Thinking Pedagogy: Enhancing Creativity, Critical Thinking, and Ethical Reasoning in Higher Education (2025) · cites this paper as O'Dea, 2024
The Introduction (page unavailable) says institutional policies and alignment with university strategy matter for effective GenAI integration, and it discusses adoption across country contexts. It does not establish that faculty attitudes, digital infrastructure, or curricular autonomy mediate adoption; its discussion of staff views does not test their effect on adoption. (LLM, conf=0.84)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
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
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 · cited 1× · see citing works
“There are many ethical concerns about GenAI, such as data privacy and security, copyright and intel-ligential property infringement, inequitable access and technological reediness (Kasneci et al. 2023; Yan et al. 2023).”
BackgroundZawacki-Richter, O., Marín, V. I., Bond, M., & Gouverneur, F. (2019) · International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education · doi:10.1186/s41239-019-0171-0 · Cited by 7,242 · cited 1× · see citing works
“…with automated learning and administrative support; predicting student academic performance; and marking student assessments automatedly, have been discussed and evaluated in various systematic review papers (Bearman, Ryan, and Ajjawi 2023; Crompton and Burke 2023; Zawacki-Richter et al. 2019).”
BackgroundArtificial intelligence in higher education: the state of the field
Crompton, H., & Burke, D. (2023) · International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education · doi:10.1186/s41239-023-00392-8 · Cited by 2,010 · cited 1× · see citing works
“…with automated learning and administrative support; predicting student academic performance; and marking student assessments automatedly, have been discussed and evaluated in various systematic review papers (Bearman, Ryan, and Ajjawi 2023; Crompton and Burke 2023; Zawacki-Richter et al. 2019).”
BackgroundChatGPT: Bullshit spewer or the end of traditional assessments in higher education?
(2023) · Journal of Applied Learning & Teaching · doi:10.37074/jalt.2023.6.1.9 · Cited by 1,806 · see citing works
ChatGPT for Language Teaching and Learning
Kohnke, L., Moorhouse, B. L., & Zou, D. (2023) · RELC Journal · doi:10.1177/00336882231162868 · Cited by 1,371 · see citing works
Practical and ethical challenges of large language models in education: A systematic scoping review
Yan, L., Sha, L., Zhao, L., Li, Y., Martinez‐Maldonado, R., Chen, G., Li, X., Jin, Y., & Gašević, D. (2024) · British Journal of Educational Technology · doi:10.1111/bjet.13370 · Cited by 935 · cited 1× · see citing works
“There are many ethical concerns about GenAI, such as data privacy and security, copyright and intel-ligential property infringement, inequitable access and technological reediness (Kasneci et al. 2023; Yan et al. 2023).”
BackgroundChallenges and Opportunities of Generative AI for Higher Education as Explained by ChatGPT
Michel-Villarreal, R., Vilalta-Perdomo, E., Salinas-Navarro, D. E., Thierry-Aguilera, R., & Gerardou, F. S. (2023) · Education Sciences · doi:10.3390/educsci13090856 · Cited by 877 · cited 1× · see citing works
“The rapid growth of GenAI has generated considerable interest in the field of AIEd since November 2022, and there have been peer-reviewed journal articles discussing opportunities and concerns in higher education (Atlas 2023; Michel-Villarreal et al. 2023; Rudolph, Tan, and Tan 2023).”
BackgroundChatGPT 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 1× · see citing works
“In addition, it appears that the responses produced by GenAI cannot be detected easily by plagiarism checkers and AI detectors (Sullivan, Kelly, and McLaughlan 2023).”
BackgroundHuman-AI collaboration patterns in AI-assisted academic writing
Nguyen, A., Hong, Y., Dang, B., & Huang, X. (2024) · Studies in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/03075079.2024.2323593 · Cited by 449 · see citing works
Bozkurt, A., Xiao, J., Lambert, S., Pazurek, A., Crompton, H., Koseoglu, S., Farrow, R., Bond, M., Nerantzi, C., Honeychurch, S., et al. (2023) · Zenodo · doi:10.5281/zenodo.7636568 · Cited by 350 · see citing works
The influence of AI text generators on critical thinking skills in UK business schools
Essien, A., Bukoye, O. T., O’Dea, X., & Kremantzis, M. (2024) · Studies in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/03075079.2024.2316881 · Cited by 252 · see citing works
Self-citationCrawford, J., Allen, K.-A., Pani, B., & Cowling, M. (2024) · Studies in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/03075079.2024.2326956 · Cited by 224 · see citing works
Yang, Y., Luo, J., Yang, M., Yang, R., & Chen, J. (2024) · Studies in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/03075079.2024.2327003 · Cited by 129 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 10
- Bearman, M., J. Ryan, and R. Ajjawi. 2023. “Discourses of Artificial Intelligence in Higher Education: A Critical Literature Review.” Higher Education 86 (2): 369–85. The May 2023 BJET Special Issue on Theorising Artificial Intelligence in Education May also Provide Some Useful Framing Material. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-022-00937-2. · DOI · Paper page
- Bhat, S., H. A. Nguyen, S. Moore, J. Stamper, M. Sakr, and E. Nyberg. 2022. “Towards Automated Generation and Evaluation of Questions in Educational Domains.” In Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Educational Data Mining, 701–704. Durham, UK: International Educational Data Mining Society.
- Dwivedi, Y. K., N. Kshetri, L. Hughes, E. L. Slade, A. Jeyaraj, A. K. Kar, A. M. Baabdullah, et al. 2023. “So What If ChatGPT Wrote it?” Multidisciplinary Perspectives on Opportunities, Challenges and Implications of Generative Conversational AI for Research, Practice and Policy.” International Journal of Information Management 71:102642. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2023.102642. · DOI · Paper page
- Eke, D. O. 2023. “ChatGPT and the Rise of Generative AI: Threat to Academic Integrity?” Journal of Responsible Technology 13:100060. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrt.2023.100060. · DOI · Paper page
- Guo, B., X. Zhang, Z. Wang, M. Jiang, J. Nie, Y. Ding, J. Yue, and Y. Wu. 2023. “How Close is Chatgpt to Human Experts? Comparison Corpus, Evaluation, and Detection.” arXiv preprint arXiv:2301.0759.
- MacNeil, S., A. Tran, D. Mogil, S. Bernstein, E. Ross, and Z. Huang. 2022. “Generating Diverse Code Explanations Using the GPT-3 Large Language Model.” Proceedings of the 2022 ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research, New York, NY, USA – Vol. 2, 37–39, August 2022.
- Nakatumba-Nabende, J., C. Suuna, and E. Bainomugisha. 2023. “AI Ethics in Higher Education: Research Experiences from Practical Development and Deployment of AI Systems.” In AI Ethics in Higher Education: Insights from Africa and Beyond, edited by C. C. Corrigan, S. A. Asakipaam, J. J. Kponyo, and C. Luetge, 39–55. Cham: Springer International Publishing.
- O'Dea, X. C., and M. O'Dea. 2023b. “Is Artificial Intelligence Really the Next Big Thing in Learning and Teaching in Higher Education? A Conceptual Paper.” Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice 20 (5): 5. https://doi.org/10.53761/1.20.5.05. · DOI
- Soni, N., E. K. Sharma, N. Singh, and A. Kapoor. 2019. “Impact of Artificial Intelligence on Businesses: From Research, Innovation, Market Deployment to Future Shifts in Business Models.” arXiv preprint arXiv:1905.02092. · arXiv
- Tindle, R., K. Pozzebon, R. Willis, and A. A. Moustafa. 2023. “Academic Misconduct and Generative Artificial Intelligence: University Students’ Intentions, Usage, and Perceptions.” PsyArXiv Preprints 13.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Zhou, X., Teng, D., & Al-Samarraie, H. (2024) · Education Sciences · doi:10.3390/educsci14121302 · Cited by 119 · see citing works
“The discourse surrounding GenAI’s role in academia is multifaceted, oscillating between enthusiasm for its potential to significantly improve educational delivery and scepticism about its efficacy in nurturing the foundational skills necessary for academic success and lifelong learning [1].”
Rana, V., Verhoeven, B., & Sharma, M. (2025) · Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice · doi:10.53761/tjse2f36 · Cited by 48 · see citing works
Elshall, A. S., & Badir, A. (2025) · Frontiers in Education · doi:10.3389/feduc.2025.1596462 · Cited by 28 · see citing works
Luo, J. (., & Dawson, P. (2026) · Studies in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/03075079.2025.2552825 · Cited by 17 · see citing works
Mahy, T., & Li, H. (2026) · International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction · doi:10.1080/10447318.2026.2623216 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
- Authors
- O’Dea, X.
- Affiliations
- King's College London (GB)
- Corresponding author
- O’Dea, Xianghan
- ORCID
- O’Dea, Xianghan
- Venue
- Studies in Higher Education
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2024-03-22
- Volume
- 49
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 811-816
- ISSN
- 0307-5079 (ISSN-L)
- 1470-174X
- OpenAlex
- W4393071062
- Cited by
- 151
- References
- 13
- Citations by year
- 2026: 80 · 2025: 61 · 2024: 10
- FWCI
- 56.78
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Studies in Higher Education (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- Research Portal (King's College London) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- 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 › Artificial Intelligence › Artificial Intelligence Applications
- Keywords
- generative AI, higher education, AI in teaching and learning, opportunities and challenges of AI, paradigm shift
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
