Unraveling the Drivers of Artificial Intelligence (AI) Adoption in Higher Education
Abstract
In the unfolding era of digital transformation, the integration of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in educational domains poses both unprecedented opportunities and challenges. As educational institutions globally grapple with the nuances of embedding AI into pedagogical frameworks, a pressing issue emerges: What drives the adoption of AI in these settings? This study was conducted out of the exigency to understand these drivers, and navigating the intricacies of AI acceptance among higher education stakeholders. The core research question (RQ) guiding this endeavor is: “What factors predominantly influence the decision to adopt AI tools and methodologies in higher education?” Building upon data collected from 100 students via convenience sampling, regression analysis was employed to probe deeper into the dynamics. Preliminary insights underscored Cost-Effectiveness, Accessibility, and Customization as pivotal drivers, while Learning Outcomes, Efficient Learning, Adaptability, and Career Readiness registered lesser influence. Notably, the model's R2 values, signifying approximately 56.3% (Cox & Snell R Square) and 94% (Nagelkerke R Square) of the variance in AI adoption, highlighted a moderate influence of the designated variables. The model's integrity was further bolstered by the Hosmer-Lemeshow test, yielding a p-value of. 999. These findings form the bedrock for an upcoming, more granular exploration, utilizing the Decision-Making Trial and Evaluation Laboratory (DEMATEL) method, to discern the intricate causal pathways in the narrative of AI's integration in higher education.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
UNESCO advocates using AI as a helper rather than a replacement.
“UNESCO [90,91] similarly advocates using AI as a helper rather than a replacement, a stance echoed across institutional recommendations.”
From Artificial Intelligence in Higher Education: A State-of-the-Art Overview of Pedagogical Integrity, Artificial Intelligence Literacy, and Policy Integration (2025) · cites this paper as [90]
Proposed alternatives such as oral examinations, multi-phase projects, and reflective analyses are successful in maintaining authenticity.
“Proposed alternatives, including oral examinations, multi-phase projects, and reflective analyses, are successful in maintaining authenticity.”
From Artificial Intelligence in Higher Education: A State-of-the-Art Overview of Pedagogical Integrity, Artificial Intelligence Literacy, and Policy Integration (2025) · cites this paper as [90]
Rodzi et al. contend that conventional evaluation methods may become outdated in the age of generative models.
“Rodzi et al. [90] contend that conventional evaluation methods may become outdated in the age of generative models.”
From Artificial Intelligence in Higher Education: A State-of-the-Art Overview of Pedagogical Integrity, Artificial Intelligence Literacy, and Policy Integration (2025) · cites this paper as [90]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 21 · Cited by 10
- Authors
- Rodzi, Z. M., Rahman, A. A., Razali, I. N., Nazri, I. S. M., & Abd Gani, A. F.
- Affiliations
- Universiti Teknologi MARA (MY)
- Kolej Pengajian Pengkomputeran, Informatik dan Matematik, Universiti Teknologi MARA, Cawangan Negeri Sembilan, Kampus,Seremban,Malaysia,70300
- ORCID
- Rodzi, Zahari Md
- Venue
- 2023 International Conference on University Teaching and Learning (InCULT)
- Publisher
- IEEE
- Published
- 2023-10-18
- Pages
- 1-6
- OpenAlex
- W4393406483
- Cited by
- 10
- References
- 21
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 2
- FWCI
- 2.57
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- International Conference on University Teaching and Learning (InCULT) (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Artificial Intelligence in Education
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Educational Innovations and Challenges
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
- Keywords
- artificial intelligence adoption, higher education, artificial intelligence in education, adoption factors, cost-effectiveness, accessibility, customization, student perceptions, digitalization of education, DEMATEL
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