Navigating the Artificial Intelligence Jungle: Perspectives and Agency of Early-Career Researchers in Education / Navegando la jungla de la Inteligencia Artificial: Perspectivas y agencia de los investigadores noveles en educación

This poster showcases a case study of an Australian higher education institution’s artificial intelligence (AI) literacy staff development program. It offers practical suggestions to ASCILITE attendees on how to empower academic and professional staff to navigate the unknown terrain of generative AI collaboratively and responsibly. Since the release of ChatGPT in November 2022, higher education institutions have been grappling with its impact on assessment, teaching and learning, and the world of work (CRADLE Blog, 2023) -culminating in the Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency (TEQSA) Request for Information (RFI) about how institutions will engage with AI and secure course integrity (TEQSA, 2024). Effective institutional responses to TEQSA’s RFI are predicated on staff at all levels rapidly developing their AI literacy in order to conceptualise and implement the curriculum and assessment changes required. AI literacy is generally accepted to include understanding of AI tools and how they work, discussion of ethical and societal implications and critical evaluation of their outputs, and competency in integration of AI ethically and effectively into daily practice (Chan & Colloton, 2024; Hibbert, Melanie et al., 2024; Hillier, 2023). This poses a significant challenge for institutions because of rapidly evolving AI tools and the diverse capabilities and starting points of large staff cohorts, including among third space support staff responsible for implementation. ECU's evolving strategy for building organisational capacity in AI literacy is outlined in this poster. The approach, which aligns with ECU’s Framework and Guidelines for Ethical and Productive Use of AI (Edith Cowan University, 2023), is designed to empower and enable staff. It intentionally incorporates connectivist and constructivist learning theories, informed by Fink's Taxonomy of Significant Learning (Fink, 2013) and Miller's Pyramid (Miller, 1990). This meant (a) providing essential foundational knowledge about AI, (b) developing practical skills through hands-on experience and exploration, and (c) fostering collective capability through sharing and collaboration. These efforts complemented initiatives to support student AI literacy through similar impactful interventions (Sullivan et al., 2024). In 2024, ECU implemented the following activities to support academic and professional staff: “AI 101” Canvas site: Covers how AI works, ethical and societal considerations, and AI in learning and teaching. “Explore AI” workshops: Focused on practical exploration of AI tools that generate both text and images, as well as ethics, research and assessment. “AI Digest” Viva Engage Community: Provides regular updates about AI. Generative AI tools: A series of tools for trials e.g., custom chatbots and image generators. Workshops co-designed with Schools: Explores generative AI in discipline-specific ways (including arts, humanities, business, law and performing arts) Despite currently being voluntary, these initiatives have received strong engagement and positive feedback to date. For example, all respondents to the Explore AI Session feedback forms said they would recommend the sessions to colleagues. 331 academic and professional staff have engaged with the AI 101 Canvas site so far, spending a median of 3 hours and 5 minutes in the course. 74% of the 50 respondents to the AI 101 evaluation form stated that their confidence levels improved after completing the course. ECU continues to iteratively improve its AI literacy offerings and expand staff engagement, collectively making sense of generative AI and its effects as an institution.

Combining human and artificial intelligence for enhanced AI literacy in higher education

Introduction Author Arthur C. Clarke famously argued that in science fiction literature “any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic” (Clarke). On 30 November 2022, technology company OpenAI publicly released their Large Language Model (LLM)-based chatbot ChatGPT (Chat Generative Pre-Trained Transformer), and instantly it was hailed as world-changing. Initial media stories about ChatGPT highlighted the speed with which it generated new material as evidence that this tool might be both genuinely creative and actually intelligent, in both exciting and disturbing ways. Indeed, ChatGPT is part of a larger pool of Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools that can very quickly generate seemingly novel outputs in a variety of media formats based on text prompts written by users. Yet, claims that AI has become sentient, or has even reached a recognisable level of general intelligence, remain in the realm of science fiction, for now at least (Leaver). That has not stopped technology companies, scientists, and others from suggesting that super-smart AI is just around the corner. Exemplifying this, the same people creating generative AI are also vocal signatories of public letters that ostensibly call for a temporary halt in AI development, but these letters are simultaneously feeding the myth that these tools are so powerful that they are the early form of imminent super-intelligent machines. For many people, the combination of AI technologies and media hype means generative AIs are basically magical insomuch as their workings seem impenetrable, and their existence could ostensibly change the world. This article explores how the hype around ChatGPT and generative AI was deployed across the first six months of 2023, and how these technologies were positioned as either utopian or dystopian, always seemingly magical, but never banal. We look at some initial responses to generative AI, ranging from schools in Australia to picket lines in Hollywood. We offer a critique of the utopian/dystopian binary positioning of generative AI, aligning with critics who rightly argue that focussing on these extremes displaces the more grounded and immediate challenges generative AI bring that need urgent answers. Finally, we loop back to the role of schools and educators in repositioning generative AI as something to be tested, examined, scrutinised, and played with both to ground understandings of generative AI, while also preparing today’s students for a future where these tools will be part of their work and cultural landscapes. Hype, Schools, and Hollywood In December 2022, one month after OpenAI launched ChatGPT, Elon Musk tweeted: “ChatGPT is scary good. We are not far from dangerously strong AI”. Musk’s post was retweeted 9400 times, liked 73 thousand times, and presumably seen by most of his 150 million Twitter followers. This type of engagement typified the early hype and language that surrounded the launch of ChatGPT, with reports that “crypto” had been replaced by generative AI as the “hot tech topic” and hopes that it would be “‘transformative’ for business” (Browne). By March 2023, global economic analysts at Goldman Sachs had released a report on the potentially transformative effects of generative AI, saying that it marked the “brink of a rapid acceleration in task automation that will drive labor cost savings and raise productivity” (Hatzius et al.). Further, they concluded that “its ability to generate content that is indistinguishable from human-created output and to break down communication barriers between humans and machines reflects a major advancement with potentially large macroeconomic effects” (Hatzius et al.). Speculation about the potentially transformative power and reach of generative AI technology was reinforced by warnings that it could also lead to “significant disruption” of the labour market, and the potential automation of up to 300 million jobs, with associated job losses for humans (Hatzius et al.). In addition, there was widespread buzz that ChatGPT’s “rationalization process may evidence human-like cognition” (Browne), claims that were supported by the emergent language of ChatGPT. The technology was explained as being “trained” on a “corpus” of datasets, using a “neural network” capable of producing “natural language“” (Dsouza), positioning the technology as human-like, and more than ‘artificial’ intelligence. Incorrect responses or errors produced by the tech were termed “hallucinations”, akin to magical thinking, which OpenAI founder Sam Altman insisted wasn’t a word that he associated with sentience (Intelligencer staff). Indeed, Altman asserts that he rejects moves to “anthropomorphize” (Intelligencer staff) the technology; however, arguably the language, hype, and Altman’s well-publicised misgivings about ChatGPT have had the combined effect of shaping our understanding of this generative AI as alive, vast, fast-moving, and potentially lethal to humanity. Unsurprisingly, the hype around the transformative effects of ChatGPT and its ability to generate ‘human-like’ answers and sophisticated essay-style responses was matched by a concomitant panic throughout educational institutions. The beginning of the 2023 Australian school year was marked by schools and state education ministers meeting to discuss the emerging problem of ChatGPT in the education system (Hiatt). Every state in Australia, bar South Australia, banned the use of the technology in public schools, with a “national expert task force” formed to “guide” schools on how to navigate ChatGPT in the classroom (Hiatt). Globally, schools banned the technology amid fears that students could use it to generate convincing essay responses whose plagiarism would be undetectable with current software (Clarence-Smith). Some schools banned the technology citing concerns that it would have a “negative impact on student learning”, while others cited its “lack of reliable safeguards preventing these tools exposing students to potentially explicit and harmful content” (Cassidy). ChatGPT investor Musk famously tweeted, “It’s a new world. Goodbye homework!”, further fuelling the growing alarm about the freely available technology that could “churn out convincing essays which can't be detected by their existing anti-plagiarism software” (Clarence-Smith). Universities were reported to be moving towards more “in-person supervision and increased paper assessments” (SBS), rather than essay-style assessments, in a bid to out-manoeuvre ChatGPT’s plagiarism potential. Seven months on, concerns about the technology seem to have been dialled back, with educators more curious about the ways the technology can be integrated into the classroom to good effect (Liu et al.); however, the full implications and impacts of the generative AI are still emerging. In May 2023, the Writer’s Guild of America (WGA), the union representing screenwriters across the US creative industries, went on strike, and one of their core issues were “regulations on the use of artificial intelligence in writing” (Porter). Early in the negotiations, Chris Keyser, co-chair of the WGA’s negotiating committee, lamented that “no one knows exactly what AI’s going to be, but the fact that the companies won’t talk about it is the best indication we’ve had that we have a reason to fear it” (Grobar). At the same time, the Screen Actors’ Guild (SAG) warned that members were being asked to agree to contracts that stipulated that an actor’s voice could be re-used in future scenarios without that actor’s additional consent, potentially reducing actors to a dataset to be animated by generative AI technologies (Scheiber and Koblin). In a statement issued by SAG, they made their position clear that the creation or (re)animation of any digital likeness of any part of an actor must be recognised as labour and properly paid, also warning that any attempt to legislate around these rights should be strongly resisted (Screen Actors Guild). Unlike the more sensationalised hype, the WGA and SAG responses to generative AI are grounded in labour relations. These unions quite rightly fear the immediate future where human labour could be augmented, reclassified, and exploited by, and in the name of, algorithmic systems. Screenwriters, for example, might be hired at much lower pay rates to edit scripts first generated by ChatGPT, even if those editors would really be doing most of the creative work to turn something clichéd and predictable into something more appealing. Rather than a dystopian world where machines do all the work, the WGA and SAG protests railed against a world where workers would be paid less because executives could pretend generative AI was doing most of the work (Bender). The Open Letter and Promotion of AI Panic In an open letter that received enormous press and media uptake, many of the leading figures in AI called for a pause in AI development since “advanced AI could represent a profound change in the history of life on Earth”; they warned early 2023 had already seen “an out-of-control race to develop and deploy ever more powerful digital minds that no one – not even their creators – can understand, predict, or reliably control” (Future of Life Institute). Further, the open letter signatories called on “all AI labs to immediately pause for at least 6 months the training of AI systems more powerful than GPT-4”, arguing that “labs and independent experts should use this pause to jointly develop and implement a set of shared safety protocols for advanced AI design and development that are rigorously audited and overseen by independent outside experts” (Future of Life Institute). Notably, many of the signatories work for the very companies involved in the “out-of-control race”. Indeed, while this letter could be read as a moment of ethical clarity for the AI industry, a more cynical reading might just be that in warning that their AIs could effectively destroy the w

In contemporary society, Artificial Intelligence (AI) pervades numerous facets of our lives and is likely to impact many sectors and professions, including education. Tertiary-level students in particular face challenges regarding the use of AI for studies and assessment, including limited understanding of AI tools, as well as a lack of deep critical engagement with AI for learning (Shibani et al., 2024). To respond to emerging developments in generative AI, the recent Australian Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency (TEQSA) report suggests tertiary-level learning and assessments be designed to foster responsible and ethical use of AI (Lodge et al., 2023). This involves the development of AI literacy among students to engage with AI in critical, ethical ways that aid their learning and not hinder it. Our project aims to narrow the AI literacy gap among students from diverse study backgrounds by providing foundational knowledge and developing critical skills for practical use of AI tools for learning and professional practice, in collaboration with students and academics as part of a Students as Partners (SAP) initiative. Staff bring expertise in AI critical engagement and students bring practical, first-hand experiences of learning in this collaboration, supported by the university’s SAP program. Building on the current UNESCO recommendations for the use of generative AI in education (UNESCO, 2023) and prior theoretical frameworks on AI literacy (Chiu et al., 2024; Ng, et al., 2021; Southworth et al., 2023) we target key skills that higher education students should develop to meaningfully engage with AI. By creating accessible and engaging resources, such as instructional videos and comprehensive guides on generative AI applications like ChatGPT and ways to prompt for enhancing learning, we introduce existing AI tools and teach students to use them effectively, promoting a hands-on learning environment. Using learning design principles, the developed curriculum will be presented in an AI Literacy module on a Canvas site, with supporting instruction workshopped with student participants for evaluation. Student cohorts recruited from diverse disciplines will pilot and assess the effectiveness of the program, and qualitative methods such as focus groups and interviews will be used for evaluation of our intervention and continuous improvements. Findings will inform tertiary students’ current level of AI literacy and the effectiveness of interventions to improve key skills beyond their disciplinary knowledge, better preparing them for life beyond university. Indeed, the implementation of similar AI literacy courses has demonstrated statistically significant improvements in AI literacy and understanding of AI concepts amongst university students (Kong, Cheung, & Zhang, 2021). Our approach underscores the importance of relational engagement in higher education with students as partners (Matthews, 2018) and participatory design with students in a topic that is significant in the current age of AI (Laupichler et al., 2022). The course's flexibility to be accessed directly or embedded into other curricula ensures scalability and broader impact, solidifying the validity of our multifaceted approach. Through utilising relevant research methodologies and learning design principles, we endeavour to create an AI literacy course that is robust, accessible, educational, and engaging to use by tertiary-level students from diverse study backgrounds.

Teacher education students play double role as present learners and future educators. Hence, they need targeted training to navigate the growing influence of Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) on teaching, learning and professional identity. However, existing artificial intelligence (AI) literacy programmes predominantly emphasize technical AI knowledge and pre‐GenAI tools or are offered by GenAI platforms that focus on their own technologies' features, thereby lacking pedagogically structured frameworks that address non‐technical dimensions such as ethics, contextual understanding and the development of human‐centered, critical and lifelong learning mindsets to adapt to rapid technology changes. Furthermore, limitation of time in teacher education syllabus and faculty's lack of AI literacy require targeted intervention. This design‐based research (DBR) aims to fill this gap by developing and evaluating a set of design principles for GenAI literacy training in teacher education. Integrating contemporary AI competency frameworks for learners and teachers, the study implements these principles in a workshop that serves as the research prototype. The prototype was first piloted with 14 master's students and then evaluated with 29 teacher education (TE) students. Results show significant gains in participants' AI competence self‐efficacy, attitudes towards GenAI and commitment to critical, ethical and pedagogical engagement with GenAI tools. The findings highlight the need for teacher education programmes to integrate GenAI literacy that supports teachers' evolving roles as reflective practitioners, co‐creators and lifelong learners in an AI‐driven world. Practitioner notes What is already known about this topic Students' self‐efficacy and mindset influence their adoption of GenAI in learning and teaching. GenAI competency is essential for teacher education students, encompassing technological, ethical and sociocultural dimensions. Implementing AI literacy training faces challenges such as educators' limited AI literacy, the lack of pedagogical frameworks and the need to integrate technical knowledge with ethical reasoning, self‐regulated learning and metacognitive skills. Transformative learning is crucial in preparing teacher education students as co‐creators and facilitators in AI‐enhanced education. What this paper adds This study presents the design and evaluation of an AI competency training programme to enhance teacher education students' self‐efficacy, critical and human‐centered AI mindsets and human–AI interaction skills. Using design‐based research, it identifies key principles for AI literacy training, demonstrating how transformative, active and experiential learning approaches can prepare teacher education students for evolving roles in AI‐enhanced education. Implications for practice and/or policy Educational technologists can apply the proposed design principles to develop GenAI tools and AI systems that enhance AI competency and self‐regulated learning (SRL). Educators can integrate these AI training principles into their teaching strategies and enhance their task assignments and assessments to foster deep learning, self‐regulated learning and metacognitive skills in the age of GenAI. Policymakers should update teacher education curriculum to include AI competency, strengthen content and pedagogical knowledge, especially in social emotional learning, formative and authentic assessment methods and establish guidelines for selecting GenAI tools that support human intelligence and mitigate over‐reliance.

Nursing students' artificial intelligence (AI) literacy, AI self-efficacy and AI self-competency: A cross-sectional design and structural equation model analysis.

Artificial Intelligence (AI), particularly Generative AI (GenAI) and Large Language Models (LLMs), is rapidly reshaping higher education by transforming teaching, learning, assessment, research, and institutional management. This entry provides a state-of-the-art, comprehensive, evidence-based synthesis of established AI applications and their implications within the higher education landscape, emphasizing mature knowledge aimed at educators, researchers, and policymakers. AI technologies now support personalized learning pathways, enhance instructional efficiency, and improve academic productivity by facilitating tasks such as automated grading, adaptive feedback, and academic writing assistance. The widespread adoption of AI tools among students and faculty members has created a critical need for AI literacy—encompassing not only technical proficiency but also critical evaluation, ethical awareness, and metacognitive engagement with AI-generated content. Key opportunities include the deployment of adaptive tutoring and real-time feedback mechanisms that tailor instruction to individual learning trajectories; automated content generation, grading assistance, and administrative workflow optimization that reduce faculty workload; and AI-driven analytics that inform curriculum design and early intervention to improve student outcomes. At the same time, AI poses challenges related to academic integrity (e.g., plagiarism and misuse of generative content), algorithmic bias and data privacy, digital divides that exacerbate inequities, and risks of “cognitive debt” whereby over-reliance on AI tools may degrade working memory, creativity, and executive function. The lack of standardized AI policies and fragmented institutional governance highlight the urgent necessity for transparent frameworks that balance technological adoption with academic values. Anchored in several foundational pillars (such as a brief description of AI higher education, AI literacy, AI tools for educators and teaching staff, ethical use of AI, and institutional integration of AI in higher education), this entry emphasizes that AI is neither a panacea nor an intrinsic threat but a “technology of selection” whose impact depends on the deliberate choices of educators, institutions, and learners. When embraced with ethical discernment and educational accountability, AI holds the potential to foster a more inclusive, efficient, and democratic future for higher education; however, its success depends on purposeful integration, balancing innovation with academic values such as integrity, creativity, and inclusivity.

With the fast, rapid, and expeditious integration of Artificial Intelligence (AI) technologies, particularly Generative AI and Augmented Analytics, organizations are presented with new opportunities to transform their operations and empower their workforce. This paper explores the intersection of AI literacy, Generative AI, and Augmented Analytics to propose strategies for fostering a culture of AI fluency among employees. This paper reviews the literature on AI literacy and its potential implications for employee experience (Ex) in digital workplaces. AI literacy and competency is the ability to understand, interact with, and thoughtfully assess the applications and ramifications of artificial intelligence (AI) across diverse domains. The paper argues that AI literacy is a key competence for employees in the digital era, as it enables them to leverage the potential of generative AI and augmented analytics, two of the most promising technologies for enhancing Ex. Generative AI refers to the use of AI to create novel and diverse outputs, such as text, images, music, or designs, while augmented analytics drives potential capability to make use of Artificial Intelligence technologies to automate and augment data analysis and decision-making. The paper discusses how these technologies can empower employees to be more creative, productive, collaborative, and engaged in their work and the challenges and risks they pose. This paper additionally highlights the obstacles, deficiencies, and proposed pathways for further research advancement concerning AI technological competency and literacy, aiming to enhance the employee experience significantly in digital workplaces.

The embedding of generative AI (GenAI) tools in education has become a groundbreaking development, creating significant opportunities to enrich teaching practices and drive innovative learning design. This study investigates how educators evaluate the impact of these tools on their teaching, the extent to which their practices align with established pedagogical frameworks and how artificial intelligence (AI) literacy influences their adoption and use of such technologies. Employing a mixed-methods approach, the research analysed survey data from participants of a Generative AI in Education massive online open courses (MOOC). Quantitative findings reveal high levels of satisfaction with AI tools, with educators reporting improved engagement and efficiency. Qualitative insights highlight key benefits, such as support for higher-order thinking and personalised learning, alongside challenges related to time constraints, AI literacy gaps and resource limitations. This study employs theoretical frameworks, including Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK), Substitution, Augmentation, Modification and Redefinition (SAMR) and Bloom’s Taxonomy, to evaluate how educators integrate AI into their teaching. While many respondents reported achieving a balance between traditional and innovative pedagogies, fewer utilised AI tools for transformative practices. The findings underscore the need for targeted professional development, tailored resources and ongoing ethical considerations to maximise the benefits of AI in education. This research advances the discussion on AI-enhanced teaching by offering actionable insights for educators and institutions aiming to align AI tools with pedagogical goals. By addressing barriers and utilising the functionalities of GenAI, this study advocates for its role in redefining teaching and learning, setting the stage for more engaging, efficient and equitable educational experiences. This article is also included in The Business & Management Collection which can be accessed at https://hstalks.com/business/.

IntroductionFostering Artificial Intelligence (AI) literacy and equipping college students with 21st-century skills in the generative AI era have become a global educational priority. In this context, generative AI offers opportunities for development in higher education institutions. Thus, this study investigates the influence of AI literacy and 21st-century skills on generative AI acceptance.MethodsFor data collection, the study employed a quantitative design with three scales, and the study sample included 260 college students selected randomly.ResultsResults revealed that AI literacy and 21st-century skills are present at a moderate level among college students. AI literacy and 21st-century skills influence the generative AI Acceptance level.DiscussionBased on the results, the study recommends enriching the curriculum with AI literacy and equipping students with 21st-century skills while using generative AI applications.

With the increasing use of Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools like ChatGPT and Bard, universities face challenges in maintaining academic integrity. This research investigates the impact of these tools on learning outcomes (factual knowledge, comprehension, critical thinking) in selected universities of Ghana's Upper East Region during the 2023-2024 academic year. The study specifically analyzes changes in student comprehension and academic integrity concerns when using Generative AI for content generation, research assistance, and summarizing complex topics. A mixed-methods approach was employed, combining qualitative data from interviews and open-ended questions with quantitative analysis of survey data and academic records. The research focuses on three institutions: C. K. Tedam University of Technology and Applied Sciences, Bolgatanga Technical University, and Regentropfen University College. A purposive sampling technique recruited 150 participants (50 from each university) who had used Generative AI tools. Key findings show that 72% of students reported improved understanding of course material through Generative AI use, yet 75% cited academic integrity as a primary concern. Quantitative analysis revealed a weak to moderate positive correlation (r = 0.45) between AI tool usage and improved grades, with variations depending on the specific AI tasks performed. Qualitative data highlighted concerns about overreliance on AI and its impact on critical thinking skills. This research contributes to the ongoing debate on AI's role in education by providing valuable insights for educators and policymakers worldwide. The findings suggest that while AI tools can enhance comprehension, ethical considerations and potential drawbacks related to critical thinking require careful attention. The study concludes with recommendations for integrating AI literacy programs, developing ethical guidelines, and implementing advanced plagiarism detection systems to harness the benefits of Generative AI while mitigating risks to academic integrity. Although specific to the Upper East Region of Ghana, these insights may be applicable to other educational systems with similar characteristics.

There is a growing interest in using generative artificial intelligence (AI) for educational purposes within the higher education environments, while AI applications (such as ChatGPT) can transform traditional teaching and learning methods. ChatGPT is an advanced AI tool that generates new content and human-like responses. The purpose of this paper is to use ChatGPT as a research assistant in order to explore ways AI can be harnessed to enhance pedagogical practices in higher education. This is a qualitative study, in which the output-responses generated by ChatGPT provided a starting point for the investigation. AI can be harnessed to enhance pedagogical practices in higher education in various ways including personalized learning, automated assessment and feedback generation, virtual assistants and chatbots, content creation, resource recommendation, time management, language translation and support, research assistance, simulations and virtual labs. Other educational affordances that can strengthen the teaching and learning experience regard collaboration and communication, accessibility and inclusivity, as well as AI literacy. When implementing AI tools such as ChatGPT in higher education, ethical considerations (e.g., data privacy, transparency, accessibility, cultural sensitivity), potential misuses and concerns need to also be addressed. Although ChatGPT can aid the generation of content-ideas for further exploration, it is a complementary-supportive tool, and its output necessitates human evaluation and review. The integration of ChatGPT and other AI tools in the higher educational process/practices has implications for educators, students, design of curricula, and university policy makers. Received: 17 January 2024 | Revised: 27 February 2024 | Accepted: 19 March 2024 Conflicts of Interest The author declares that she has no conflicts of interest to this work. Data Availability Statement Data sharing is not applicable to this article as no new data were created or analyzed in this study.

Aim/Purpose In a post-pandemic learning environment, artificial intelligence (AI) may become the new standard. More and more college students are utilizing AI tools like ChatGPT and Bard to enhance their learning. This study compares the use of web-search and AI-based systems to assess how much students' knowledge has improved in an Internet Marketing course. Background While authorship and academic integrity have received a lot of attention in higher education research thus far, using AI effectively provides several benefits for both teaching and learning. In other words, by utilizing these capabilities, AI-based systems may boost students' motivation, interest, and level of knowledge. Methodology The course will teach the students how to use the application of AI (i.e. ChatGPT). To evaluate the efficacy of AI technology, this study will conduct empirical research to compare the knowledge improvement of students who would obtain knowledge about buying sustainable production products in Taiwan between using the web-search systems and the AI-based systems. The assessments of students' knowledge growth are evaluated by using a dependent samples t-test. Contribution This finding expands on prior research examining the possibility of using AI-powered learning aids to inspire students (Al Shamsi et al., 2022; Lund et al., 2023). The ability of ChatGPT to deliver cutting-edge content, personalized feedback, and interactive learning sessions may all contribute to generating curiosity, a sense of accomplishment, and ultimately a greater desire to learn more about subjects. Findings It is anticipated that the AI chatbots created for information delivery might have something to do with students' increased interest in, motivation for, and understanding of their studies. This study examines the potential benefits to students' understanding of sustainable development goals with an AI-specific method of information provision relevant to purchasing items produced sustainably. Recommendations for Practitioners In the near run, using AI systems has been proven to boost university students' sentiments. University students may feel more supported by AI when they use it more regularly. Long-term AI use may cause reliance, especially in the absence of human companionship. Recommendations for Researchers Not all students and instructors have a lot of experiences in teaching and learning with generative AI, despite the fact that it is a relatively new technology. After generative AI is completely incorporated into classrooms, the roles of AI in teaching and learning could reconsider. Impact on Society In order to prepare students for work in a world driven by generative AI, higher education in the future needs change. With an emphasis on in-class and hands-on activities for assessment, new learning outcomes—skills in learning and teaching with AI, AI literacy—and the importance of interdisciplinarity should be highlighted. Future Research Future studies should concentrate on the following topics: interdisciplinary education, creative pedagogies and their evaluation, new assessment and its acceptability.

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is at the top of the agendas of higher education and education leaders are required to give direction in educating the next generation of students and citizens. AI holds positive answers to technological innovations, but the potential for continued inequities, exclusion and divides must not be ignored. As a relatively new concept, AI literacy is often viewed as a complex concept requiring more detailed conceptualisation. Furthermore, with the recent hype around generative AI (GenAI), discussions and explorations around what AI literacy is, are now being deliberated. Historically AI was the domain of mathematicians and computer scientists. This is changing as the wider implication of AI permeates all aspects of society, in particular the ethical and informed use of AI and GenAI is paramount. This leaves higher education with the dilemma of deciding who is responsible in teaching and facilitation AI literacy. Keeping in mind that there is an abundance of new literacies in academia. This problem is particularly pronounced in the Global South countries, where digital exclusions and social injustice are becoming more complex. This scoping review evaluated 40 screened and eligible peer reviewed articles and conference proceedings published between 2020- 2024 on AI literacy in higher education in the Global South. The aim of the study was to gauge the extant research on AI literacy and its subsequent ethical implications in higher education in the Global South. The study further explored which philosophies and frameworks inform and guide AI literacy research and support in higher education within the selected region. Findings are that while the disciplines of education are engaging in research, other disciplines such as Information Science are interdisciplinary actors in teaching and facilitating AI literacy, but that there is a pronounced paucity in research being conducted

Artificial intelligence (AI) literacy is essential for understanding and benefiting from AI, yet little is known about how users form misconceptions of AI and how AI literacy (AIL) mitigates them. Adopting media dependency theory, this study examines factors influencing dependence on generative AI (DGAI) and its relationship with fear of AI (FAI) across different AIL levels. The in-depth interviews reveal three stages of developing DGAI: tool acceptance, habit formation, and psychological dependence. This dependency raises concerns about privacy, skill degradation, and job displacement. Survey results show that perceived risk directly increases FAI, while perceived usefulness and anthropomorphism indirectly affect FAI through DGAI, with self-efficacy reducing DGAI. Moderation analysis finds that AIL buffers the fear-inducing effects of usefulness and anthropomorphism, especially at low AIL levels. This study emphasizes the dynamic relationship between AIL, users’ dependency, and attitudes toward generative AI, emphasizing AIL’s role in reducing misconceptions and fostering sustainable AI development.