Cited by 66Artificial Intelligence in EducationArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare and EducationEthics and Social Impacts of AI

Preparing to Revolutionize Education with the Multi-Model GenAI Tool Google Gemini? A Journey Towards Effective Policy Making

Open access
Perera, Pethigamage, Lankathilake, Madhushan·2023·Journal of Advances in Education and Philosophy

Abstract

The integration of Generative AI (GenAI) in Education presents immense potential for reshaping learning experiences and empowering students and educators. However, harnessing this potential requires collective action and responsible decision- making to ensure the effective and ethical use of AI technologies. This paper presents a series of recommendations and proposals aimed at effectively integrating GenAI in the higher education sector, catering to the perspectives of government, AI developers, students, educators, universities, schools, and researchers. By exploring diverse viewpoints about ChatGPT and future Google Gemini, this research aims to create a comprehensive recommendation guiding regulatory measures that address challenges, ethical considerations, and best practices of GenAI integration. Through a holistic approach, researchers believe that policymakers can foster a transformative and ethical environment, leveraging the full potential of generative AI while safeguarding students' well-being and academic integrity.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.36348/jaep.2023.v07i08.001

Cites

0 citation errors · 1 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Existing policies vary widely, with some institutions enthusiastically adopting GenAI technologies and integrating GenAI literacy into their curricula, while others are more cautious, focusing on potential risks and ethical dilemmas.

    “Existing policies vary widely, with some institutions enthusiastically adopting GenAI technologies and integrating GenAI literacy into their curricula. In contrast, others are more cautious, focusing on the potential risks and ethical dilemmas.”

    From Generative AI in Higher Education: Balancing Innovation and Integrity (2025) · cites this paper as Perera and Lankathilake [53]

    The “Curriculum Inclusion of AI” and “Ethical Principles and Guidelines” sections recommend curricular integration and attention to risks and ethics. The “Learning from International and Domestic Practices” section acknowledges different policy responses, but these passages do not establish that existing institutions divide into the enthusiastic and cautious groups described, or that some have already integrated GenAI literacy into their curricula. No page numbers are available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.83)

    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

The publisher hasn’t deposited this paper’s reference list.

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five Approaches. Sage Publications Ltd.
  2. Dwivedi, Y. K., Kshetri, N., Hughes, L., Slade, E. L., Jeyaraj, A., Kar, A. K., ... & Wright, R. (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.
  3. Finkle, T. A., & Masters, E. (2014). Do MOOCs pose a threat to higher Education? Research in Higher Education Journal, 26, 1-10.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Perera, P., & Lankathilake, M.
Affiliations
Central Queensland University (AU)
Venue
Journal of Advances in Education and Philosophy
Published
2023-08-09
Volume
7
Issue
08
Pages
246-253
ISSN
  • 2523-2223 (ISSN-L)
  • 2523-2665
OpenAlex
W4385719938
Cited by
66
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 25 · 2024: 28 · 2023: 2
FWCI
15.46
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Advances in Education and Philosophy (publishedVersion)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Artificial Intelligence in Education
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
Keywords
generative AI in education, Google Gemini, ChatGPT, higher education, AI policy, AI regulation, ethical use of AI, academic integrity, student well-being, stakeholder perspectives

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