University staff and student perspectives on competent and ethical use of AI: uncovering similarities and divergences

Abstract We investigated the similarities and differences in understanding among UK-based university staff and students regarding AI literacy, in terms of competent and ethical use of AI tools. This study builds on existing research revealing both wide use of AI tools in higher education, but also a lack of shared understanding among stakeholder groups on what constitutes competent and ethical use of AI. This study is one of the first to combine insights from staff and students, illustrating specific concerns over AI competence and ethical implications in granular detail. The results reveal a significant disparity in the use of AI tools between students and staff, particularly in the adoption of text-based or conversational GenAI tools (cGenAI). Students reported extensive use of cGenAI tools for a range of tasks, while staff engagement was generally limited to brainstorming ideas or generating teaching tasks. Although the use of cGenAI is seen by most as AI competence, nuanced differences emerged between staff and student opinion depending on the application of the AI tool. Ethical issues in both groups were prominent, although staff reported more negative systemic concerns regarding inherent bias, concerns over transparency and data ownership. Over 90% of staff flagged the use of cGenAI for essay-generation as problematic, compared to 58% of students, primarily due to concerns regarding academic integrity. These differences point to the need for institutional guidelines and dialogue to address ethical concerns and align expectations across stakeholder groups to ensure the effective integration of AI literacy in higher education.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education
Published
2025-09-30
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-025-00557-7
Citations
3
Primary Topic
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
7.10
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

University staff and student perspectives on competent and ethical use of AI: uncovering similarities and divergences

Clare Wright, Manoj Ravi, Kashmir Kaur, Matt Bawn et al.
3 citations
International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
7.10
article

University staff and student perspectives on competent and ethical use of AI: uncovering similarities and divergences

Clare Wright, Manoj Ravi, Kashmir Kaur, Matt Bawn, Luisa Cutillo
article en
3 citations

Abstract

Abstract We investigated the similarities and differences in understanding among UK-based university staff and students regarding AI literacy, in terms of competent and ethical use of AI tools. This study builds on existing research revealing both wide use of AI tools in higher education, but also a lack of shared understanding among stakeholder groups on what constitutes competent and ethical use of AI. This study is one of the first to combine insights from staff and students, illustrating specific concerns over AI competence and ethical implications in granular detail. The results reveal a significant disparity in the use of AI tools between students and staff, particularly in the adoption of text-based or conversational GenAI tools (cGenAI). Students reported extensive use of cGenAI tools for a range of tasks, while staff engagement was generally limited to brainstorming ideas or generating teaching tasks. Although the use of cGenAI is seen by most as AI competence, nuanced differences emerged between staff and student opinion depending on the application of the AI tool. Ethical issues in both groups were prominent, although staff reported more negative systemic concerns regarding inherent bias, concerns over transparency and data ownership. Over 90% of staff flagged the use of cGenAI for essay-generation as problematic, compared to 58% of students, primarily due to concerns regarding academic integrity. These differences point to the need for institutional guidelines and dialogue to address ethical concerns and align expectations across stakeholder groups to ensure the effective integration of AI literacy in higher education.

International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher EducationVol. 22(1)
University of Leeds (GB), Newcastle University (GB)
Openalex Percentile: Top 3%
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
7.10
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.