Regression analysis showed that AI familiarity, frequency of use, and policy awareness were significantly associated with stronger support for empowerment-oriented governance, which inform a five-pillar framework for responsible AI integration encompassing AI Literacy Integration, Stage-Based Access, Transparent Use Norms, Assessment Innovation, and Faculty Development.
Abstract
Generative AI tools have entered university life faster than institutions have been able to govern them, prompting policy responses that range from outright prohibition to largely unguided adoption. This paper examines the shift from restrictive to empowerment-oriented AI governance in higher education through a convergent parallel mixed-methods study comprising a structured survey (n = 71) and twenty-five semi-structured interviews across eleven academic disciplines at a private university in Bangladesh. The study documents patterns of AI adoption, stakeholder attitudes toward institutional policy, and barriers to responsible use. Participants situated within more empowerment-oriented institutional environments, including those characterised by AI literacy support, clearer ethical guidance, and stronger faculty engagement, reported greater confidence in using AI responsibly and clearer understanding of acceptable practices. By contrast, participants operating under restriction-only policies more often described uncertainty, confusion, and rule evasion. Regression analysis further showed that AI familiarity, frequency of use, and policy awareness were significantly associated with stronger support for empowerment-oriented governance. These findings inform a five-pillar framework for responsible AI integration encompassing AI Literacy Integration, Stage-Based Access, Transparent Use Norms, Assessment Innovation, and Faculty Development. Informed by stakeholder evidence and refined in dialogue with existing literature, the framework offers a practical model for institutions navigating AI governance in resource-constrained contexts. The paper contributes empirical evidence from a developing-country setting that remains underrepresented in current scholarship and highlights how responsible AI governance can support more equitable and context-sensitive higher education.
As artificial intelligence (AI) becomes increasingly embedded in higher education, empirical evidence on how institutional governance shapes its equitable and responsible implementation in South African universities remains limited. This study examined how institutional policies and governance practices influence the implementation and equitable use of AI in undergraduate education while contributing to international discourse on responsible AI governance. Guided by an interpretivist research paradigm, the study adopted a qualitative approach and employed a single-case study design within one public university in South Africa. Participants comprised university leaders, academic staff, professional support staff, and undergraduate students involved in or affected by AI governance and implementation. Data were collected through semi-structured interviews, focus group discussions, and document analysis and analysed using thematic analysis supported by inductive coding. The findings indicate that limited policy transparency, context-insensitive governance frameworks, unequal access to AI technologies, and weak institutional accountability can reinforce educational inequalities, particularly among first-generation and under-resourced students. Conversely, participatory governance, transparent decision-making, stakeholder engagement, and enhanced digital literacy promote more equitable and responsible AI implementation. The study proposes a multi-level governance model integrating institutional policy, stakeholder participation, and pedagogical practice to strengthen equitable AI adoption. It concludes that higher education institutions should develop context-sensitive AI governance frameworks, strengthen institutional capacity, and expand equitable access to AI technologies to advance fairness, inclusion, and responsible AI implementation.
R. Lumadi· International Journal of Stu...· 0 citations
The study identifies key themes in generative AI governance, including responsible experimentation, transparency, AI literacy and faculty discretion in policy implementation, including responsible experimentation, transparency, AI literacy and faculty discretion in policy implementation.
Abdullah Alotaibi, A. Aseery, Abdulaziz A. Alfayez et al.· British Educational Research...· 0 citations
Artificial intelligence (AI) has rapidly permeated higher education workplaces, yet a significant disconnect exists between employee adoption of AI tools and institutional policy awareness, governance structures, and strategic clarity. This study examines the emergent phenomenon of the "AI implementation gap" in higher education—the disparity between widespread AI tool usage and the institutional frameworks meant to guide such use. Drawing on recent survey data from nearly 2,000 higher education professionals and situating findings within broader theoretical frameworks of technology adoption, organizational change, and higher education governance, this article critically analyzes the current state of AI integration in higher education work environments. Key findings reveal that while 94% of higher education employees report using AI tools for work, only 54% are aware of relevant institutional policies, and more than half have used AI tools not sanctioned by their institutions. The analysis explores the risks, opportunities, and challenges associated with this implementation gap, including concerns about data privacy, misinformation, skill erosion, algorithmic bias, environmental impact, and the largely unmeasured return on investment of AI initiatives. The article also examines the roles of AI vendors, the ethical dimensions of AI adoption, and the implications of voluntary versus mandated technology use. The article concludes with recommendations for institutional leaders, policymakers, and researchers seeking to bridge the gap between AI adoption and governance in higher education contexts.
Jonathan H. Westover· Future of Work: The Journal...· 0 citations
It is concluded that in order for undergraduate education to continue to be relevant in a society where AI is pervasive, governance must change toward process-oriented evaluation and relational originality.
Joe Mutebi, Brian Mugisha, Ibrahim Adabara et al.· F1000Research· 0 citations
The findings suggest that academic integrity in the GenAI era is shifting from a primarily punitive model toward a pedagogy-first ecosystem that combines clear expectations, assessment redesign, equitable access to vetted tools, and iterative governance.
Yufeng Qian· International Journal for Ed...· 0 citations
First-year university students’ perceptions of generative AI in academic work are investigated, foregrounding student agency in a Global South context and offering pedagogical and policy implications for responsible AI adoption.
Sharifuzzaman, M. Rahman· Asian Journal of Contemporar...· 0 citations