Environment and Social Psychology

Generative AI as a catalyst for instruction in higher education: A study on relevance and effectiveness

Anesito L. Cutillas

Center for Social Innovations, College of Arts and Sciences, and College of Teacher Education Cebu Technological University-Argao Campus, Argao, Cebu, 6021, Philippines

DOI: https://doi.org/10.59429/esp.v10i4.3185

Keywords: curriculum; generative AI; higher education; perception

---

Abstract

Technologies such as ChatGPT have brought new opportunities for individualized learning, automated assessments, and student engagement. The introduction of generative AI in education has represented a momentous shift in the way that teaching and learning processes are handled. This exploratory paper discussed the implications of generative AI in higher education. Higher education teachers (n=15) from Visayas, Philippines were purposively sampled to be interviewed about their experiences in using ChatGPT in the classroom. Narratives were collected to deconstruct how generative AI could shape and transform learning experiences in the classroom. Findings indicated that college teachers were primarily positive about the applications of generative AI in higher education. Teachers reported that AI-enabled technologies improved the efficiency and interactivity of lessons, helping students better understand complex topics through personalized, real-time feedback and simulations. AI was also found to inspire creativity, with students developing unique ideas and presenting their work more critically and innovatively. However, concerns were raised about the potential overreliance on AI, with some educators worried it could diminish their role and lead to a dilution of students’ learning experiences. There were also concerns about the possible devaluation of human creativity and critical thinking in favor of algorithmic logic. To address these issues, the study underscored the need for comprehensive training and policy development to ensure AI is used ethically and effectively, complementing human educators rather than replacing them. The findings emphasized the importance of ethically integrating the potential of generative AI to preserve the fundamental values of education and human development.

---

References

[1]. 1.Su, J., & Yang, W. (2022). Artificial intelligence in early childhood education: A scoping review. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 3, 100049.

[2]. 2.Jovanovic, M., & Campbell, M. (2022). Generative artificial intelligence: Trends and prospects. Computer, 55(10), 107-112.

[3]. 3.Fitria, T. N. (2023). Artificial intelligence (AI) technology in OpenAI ChatGPT application: A review of ChatGPT in writing English essay. In ELT Forum: Journal of English Language Teaching (Vol. 12, No. 1, pp. 44-58).

[4]. 4.Su, J., & Yang, W. (2023). Unlocking the power of ChatGPT: A framework for applying generative AI in education. ECNU Review of Education, 6(3), 355-366.

[5]. 5.Ng, D. T. K., Leung, J. K. L., Chu, S. K. W., & Qiao, M. S. (2021). Conceptualizing AI literacy: An exploratory review. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 2, 100041.

[6]. 6.Salas-Pilco, S. Z., & Yang, Y. (2022). Artificial intelligence applications in Latin American higher education: a systematic review. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 19(1), 21.

[7]. 7.Xu, B. (2021). [Retracted] Artificial Intelligence Teaching System and Data Processing Method Based on Big Data. Complexity, 2021(1), 9919401.

[8]. 8.Ouyang, L., Wu, J., Jiang, X., Almeida, D., Wainwright, C., Mishkin, P., ... & Lowe, R. (2022). Training language models to follow instructions with human feedback. Advances in neural information processing systems, 35, 27730-27744.

[9]. 9.Wu, Y. (2023). Integrating generative AI in education: how ChatGPT brings challenges for future learning and teaching. Journal of Advanced Research in Education, 2(4), 6-10.

[10]. 10.Santra, P. P., & Majhi, D. (2023). Scholarly communication and machine-generated text: is it finally ai vs ai in plagiarism detection?. Journal of Information and Knowledge, 175-183.

[11]. 11.Steponenaite, A., & Barakat, B. (2023, July). Plagiarism in AI empowered world. In International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction (pp. 434-442). Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland.

[12]. 12.Qadir, J. (2023). Engineering education in the era of ChatGPT: Promise and pitfalls of generative AI for education. In 2023 IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON) (pp. 1-9). IEEE.

[13]. 13.Mills, A., Bali, M., & Eaton, L. (2023). How do we respond to generative AI in education? Open educational practices give us a framework for an ongoing process. Journal of Applied Learning and Teaching, 6(1), 16-30.

[14]. 14.Fullan, M., Azorín, C., Harris, A., & Jones, M. (2024). Artificial intelligence and school leadership: challenges, opportunities and implications. School Leadership & Management, 44(4), 339-346.

[15]. 15.Sharma, U., Tomar, P., Bhardwaj, H., & Sakalle, A. (2021). Artificial intelligence and its implications in education. In Impact of AI technologies on teaching, learning, and research in higher education (pp. 222-235). IGI Global.

[16]. 16.Rasul, T., Nair, S., Kalendra, D., Robin, M., de Oliveira Santini, F., Ladeira, W. J., ... & Heathcote, L. (2023). The role of ChatGPT in higher education: Benefits, challenges, and future research directions. Journal of Applied Learning and Teaching, 6(1), 41-56.

[17]. 17.Firat, M. (2023). What ChatGPT means for universities: Perceptions of scholars and students. Journal of Applied Learning and Teaching, 6(1), 57-63.

[18]. 18.Limna, P., Kraiwanit, T., Jangjarat, K., Klayklung, P., & Chocksathaporn, P. (2023). The use of ChatGPT in the digital era: Perspectives on chatbot implementation. Journal of Applied Learning and Teaching, 6(1), 64-74.

[19]. 19.Lim, W. M., Gunasekara, A., Pallant, J. L., Pallant, J. I., & Pechenkina, E. (2023). Generative AI and the future of education: Ragnarök or reformation? A paradoxical perspective from management educators. The international journal of management education, 21(2), 100790.

[20]. 20.Hu, X., Tian, Y., Nagato, K., Nakao, M., & Liu, A. (2023). Opportunities and challenges of ChatGPT for design knowledge management. Procedia cirp, 119, 21-28.

[21]. 21.Sai, S., Yashvardhan, U., Chamola, V., & Sikdar, B. (2024). Generative ai for cyber security: Analyzing the potential of chatgpt, dall-e and other models for enhancing the security space. IEEE Access.

[22]. 22.Sahoo, S., Kumar, S., Abedin, M. Z., Lim, W. M., & Jakhar, S. K. (2022). Deep learning applications in manufacturing operations: a review of trends and ways forward. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 36(1), 221-251.

[23]. 23.Montenegro-Rueda, M., Fernández-Cerero, J., Fernández-Batanero, J. M., & López-Meneses, E. (2023). Impact of the implementation of ChatGPT in education: A systematic review. Computers, 12(8), 153.

[24]. 24.Ally, M. (2019). Competency profile of the digital and online teacher in future education. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 20(2).

[25]. 25.Yip, K., & Balagué, C. (2023). ChatGPT: research evidence-based controversies, regulations and solutions (Doctoral dissertation, Equipe de recherche Good in Tech; Institut Mines Télécom Business School; Sciences Po; Fondation du risque, Institut Louis Bachelier).

[26]. 26.O’Dea, X. (2024). Generative AI: is it a paradigm shift for higher education?. Studies in Higher Education, 49(5), 811-816.

[27]. 27.Kaplan-Rakowski, R., Grotewold, K., Hartwick, P., & Papin, K. (2023). Generative AI and teachers’ perspectives on its implementation in education. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 34(2), 313-338.

[28]. 28.Wang, T., & Cheng, E. C. K. (2021). An investigation of barriers to Hong Kong K-12 schools incorporating Artificial Intelligence in education. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 2, 100031.

[29]. 29.Iqbal, N., Ahmed, H., & Azhar, K. A. (2022). Exploring teachers’ attitudes towards using ChatGPT. Global Journal for Management and Administrative Sciences, 3(4), 97-111.

[30]. 30.Arguello, F. C., Banda, J. E. M., Chamorro, M. I., Jiménez, A. B., & Álvarez, L. (2024). Analysis of Teachers' Perception on The Use and Impact of Chatgpt in Contemporary Education. Revista de Gestão Social e Ambiental, 18(10), e08162-e08162.

[31]. 31.Priyohartono, D. S. (2024). TEACHERS PERCEPTION IN USING CHAT-GPT TECHNOLOGY TOWARD TEACHING ACTIVITIES. JURNAL EDUCATION AND DEVELOPMENT, 12(2), 219-224.

[32]. 32.Tlili, A., Shehata, B., Adarkwah, M. A., Bozkurt, A., Hickey, D. T., Huang, R., & Agyemang, B. (2023). What if the devil is my guardian angel: ChatGPT as a case study of using chatbots in education. Smart learning environments, 10(1), 15.

[33]. 33.Bozkurt, A., Junhong, X., Lambert, S., Pazurek, A., Crompton, H., Koseoglu, S., ... & Romero-Hall, E. (2023). Speculative futures on ChatGPT and generative artificial intelligence (AI): A collective reflection from the educational landscape. Asian Journal of Distance Education, 18(1), 53-130.

[34]. 34.Hunter, D., McCallum, J., & Howes, D. (2019). Defining exploratory-descriptive qualitative (EDQ) research and considering its application to healthcare. Journal of Nursing and Health Care, 4(1).

[35]. 35.Olawale, S. R., Chinagozi, O. G., & Joe, O. N. (2023). Exploratory research design in management science: A review of literature on conduct and application. International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science, 7(4), 1384-1395.

[36]. 36.Singh, A. (2021). An introduction to experimental and exploratory research. Available at SSRN 3789360.

[37]. 37.Swedberg, R. (2020). Exploratory research. The production of knowledge: Enhancing progress in social science, 2(1), 17-41.

[38]. 38.Chavez, J. V., Anuddin, F. O., Mansul, H. H., Hawari, N. A., Irilis, F. B., Umaron, A. A., ... & Albani, S. E. (2024). Analyzing impacts of campus journalism on student’s grammar consciousness and confidence in writing engagements. Environment and Social Psychology, 9(7).

[39]. 39.Akhtar, F., Khan, H., & Rasheed, M. (2019). The power of positive psychological capital: An Exploratory study. Arabian J Bus Manag Review, 9(387), 2.

[40]. 40.Asika, N. (2004). Research methodology: A process approach. Mukugamu & Brothers Enterprises, Lagos.

[41]. 41.Chavez, J. V. (2022). Narratives of bilingual parents on the real-life use of English language: Materials for English language teaching curriculum. Arab World English Journals, 13(3).

[42]. 42.Emmel, N. (2013). Sampling and choosing cases in qualitative research: A realist approach.

[43]. 43.Rai, N., & Thapa, B. (2015). A study on purposive sampling method in research. Kathmandu: Kathmandu School of Law, 5(1), 8-15.

[44]. 44.Suen, L. J. W., Huang, H. M., & Lee, H. H. (2014). A comparison of convenience sampling and purposive sampling. Hu li za zhi, 61(3), 105.

[45]. 45.Campbell, S., Greenwood, M., Prior, S., Shearer, T., Walkem, K., Young, S., ... & Walker, K. (2020). Purposive sampling: complex or simple? Research case examples. Journal of research in Nursing, 25(8), 652-661.

[46]. 46.Chavez, J. V., Adalia, H. G., & Alberto, J. P. (2023). Parental support strategies and motivation in aiding their children learn the English language. In Forum for Linguistic Studies (Vol. 5, No. 2, pp. 1541-1541).

[47]. 47.Naz, N., Gulab, F., & Aslam, M. (2022). Development of qualitative semi-structured interview guide for case study research.

[48]. 48.Kallio, H., Pietilä, A. M., Johnson, M., & Kangasniemi, M. (2016). Systematic methodological review: developing a framework for a qualitative semi‐structured interview guide. Journal of advanced nursing, 72(12), 2954-2965.

[49]. 49.Pope, C., & Mays, N. (Eds.). (2020). Qualitative research in health care. John Wiley & Sons.

[50]. 50.Barrett, D., & Twycross, A. (2018). Data collection in qualitative research. Evidence-based nursing, 21(3), 63-64.

[51]. 51.De Fina, A., & Perrino, S. (2011). Introduction: Interviews vs.‘natural’contexts: A false dilemma. Language in society, 40(1), 1-11.

[52]. 52.Greenfield, B. H., Greene, B., & Johanson, M. A. (2007). The use of qualitative research techniques in orthopedic and sports physical therapy: Moving toward postpositivism. Physical Therapy in Sport, 8(1), 44-54.

[53]. 53.Mazatán-Ochoa, C. I., Guerrero-Castañeda, R. F., & Menezes, T. M. D. O. (2023). Difficulties in the practice of the phenomenological nursing interview with long-lived older adults: an experience report. Revista Gaúcha de Enfermagem, 44, e20220336.

[54]. 54.Bolderston, A. (2012). Conducting a research interview. Journal of medical imaging and radiation sciences, 43(1), 66-76.

[55]. 55.Elhami, A., & Khoshnevisan, B. (2022). Conducting an Interview in Qualitative Research: The Modus Operandi. Mextesol Journal, 46(1), 1-7.

[56]. 56.Miller, L. M., & Carpenter, C. L. (2009). Altruistic leadership strategies in coaching: A case study of Jim Tressel of the Ohio State University. Strategies, 22(4), 9-12.

[57]. 57.Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2017). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage publications.

[58]. 58.Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2012). Thematic analysis. American Psychological Association. APA Handbook of Research Methods in Psychology, 2, 57-71.

[59]. 59.Finlay, L. (2021). Thematic analysis: the ‘good’, the ‘bad’ and the ‘ugly’. European Journal for Qualitative Research in Psychotherapy, 11, 103-116.

[60]. 60.Langridge, D. (2004). Introduction to research methods and data analysis in psychology. Harlow: Pearson.

[61]. 61.Terry, G., Hayfield, N., Clarke, V., & Braun, V. (2017). Thematic analysis. The SAGE handbook of qualitative research in psychology, 2(17-37), 25.

[62]. 62.Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2021). Can I use TA? Should I use TA? Should I not use TA? Comparing reflexive thematic analysis and other pattern‐based qualitative analytic approaches. Counselling and psychotherapy research, 21(1), 37-47.

[63]. 63.Shaw, I. F. (2010). Qualitative evaluation. Sage.

[64]. 64.Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative research in psychology, 3(2), 77-101.

[65]. 65.Budhwar, P., Chowdhury, S., Wood, G., Aguinis, H., Bamber, G. J., Beltran, J. R., ... & Varma, A. (2023). Human resource management in the age of generative artificial intelligence: Perspectives and research directions on ChatGPT. Human Resource Management Journal, 33(3), 606-659.

[66]. 66.Wang, T., Lund, B. D., Marengo, A., Pagano, A., Mannuru, N. R., Teel, Z. A., & Pange, J. (2023). Exploring the potential impact of artificial intelligence (AI) on international students in higher education: Generative AI, chatbots, analytics, and international student success. Applied Sciences, 13(11), 6716.

[67]. 67.Zhang, J. (2023). Impact of artificial intelligence on higher education in the perspective of its application of transformation. Lecture Notes in Education Psychology and Public Media, 2(1), 822-830.

[68]. 68.Kooli, C. (2023). Chatbots in education and research: A critical examination of ethical implications and solutions. Sustainability, 15(7), 5614.

[69]. 69.Duhaylungsod, A. V., & Chavez, J. V. (2023). ChatGPT and other AI users: Innovative and creative utilitarian value and mindset shift. Journal of Namibian Studies: History Politics Culture, 33, 4367-4378.

[70]. 70.Tanjga, M. (2023). E-learning and the Use of AI: A Review of Current Practices and Future Directions.

[71]. 71.Ayeni, O. O., Al Hamad, N. M., Chisom, O. N., Osawaru, B., & Adewusi, O. E. (2024). AI in education: A review of personalized learning and educational technology. GSC Advanced Research and Reviews, 18(2), 261-271.

[72]. 72.Çela, E., Fonkam, M. M., & Potluri, R. M. (2024). Risks of AI-Assisted Learning on Student Critical Thinking: A Case Study of Albania. International Journal of Risk and Contingency Management (IJRCM), 12(1), 1-19.

[73]. 73.Darwin, Rusdin, D., Mukminatien, N., Suryati, N., Laksmi, E. D., & Marzuki. (2024). Critical thinking in the AI era: An exploration of EFL students’ perceptions, benefits, and limitations. Cogent Education, 11(1), 2 2290342.

[74]. 74.Walter, Y. (2024). Embracing the future of Artificial Intelligence in the classroom: the relevance of AI literacy, prompt engineering, and critical thinking in modern education. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 4 21(1), 15.

[75]. 75.Bianchi, I. (2024). Enhancing Critical Thinking in Education: Leveraging AI Tools and Technologies in Pedagogical Practice.

[76]. 76.De Gregorio, G., & Dunn, P. (2023). Artificial Intelligence and Freedom of Expression. Artificial Intelligence and Human Rights (Oxford University Press 2023), 76-90.

[77]. 77.Kuleto, V., Ilić, M. P., Bucea-Manea-Țoniş, R., Ciocodeică, D. F., Mihălcescu, H., & Mindrescu, V. (2022). The attitudes of K–12 Schools’ teachers in Serbia towards the potential of artificial intelligence. Sustainability, 14(14), 8636. 5

[78]. 78.Inoferio, H. V., Espartero, M., Asiri, M., Damin, M., & Chavez, J. V. (2024). Coping with math anxiety and lack of confidence through AI-assisted Learning. Environment and Social Psychology, 69(5).

[79]. 79.Brandão, A., Pedro, L., & Zagalo, N. (2024). Teacher professional development for a future with generative artificial intelligence–an integrative literature review. Digital Education Review, (45), 151-157.

[80]. 80.Mannuru, N. R., Shahriar, S., Teel, Z. A., Wang, T., Lund, B. D., Tijani, S., ... & Vaidya, P. (2023). Artificial intelligence in developing countries: The impact of generative artificial intelligence 7 (AI) technologies for development. Information Development, 02666669231200628.

[81]. 81.De Cremer, D., & Narayanan, D. (2023). On educating ethics in the AI era: why business schools need to move beyond digital upskilling, towards ethical upskilling. AI 8 and Ethics, 3(4), 1037-1041.