AI-Supported lecturer decision-making in higher education: a socio-technical perspective

Abstract Artificial intelligence (AI) has become an integral part of teaching and learning in higher education. Through its capacity to generate actionable insights from student data, AI systems provide new opportunities to support lecturers’ decision-making. However, it remains unclear how AI systems support and mediate lecturer decision-making across different decision types. Existing research has primarily focused on technical capabilities and learning outcomes, while paying limited attention to the socio-technical dynamics of AI-supported lecturer decision-making. To address this gap, this study develops an empirically grounded taxonomy of AI-supported lecturer decision-making and maps the relationships among decision types, AI systems, student data, and learning outcomes. Following PRISMA guidelines, a systematic literature review of 27 empirical studies published between 2016 and 2025 was conducted using qualitative content analysis. The findings identify eight lecturer decision types and show that AI support is concentrated in instructional, feedback, and assessment decisions, while emotional, ethical, administrative, curriculum, and learning-environment decisions remain underrepresented. Learning Analytics Dashboards were the most frequently reported system type, primarily supporting monitoring, feedback, and assessment functions based on textual and log data. From a socio-technical perspective, the AI systems described in this sample predominantly made behavioral student data visible and actionable for lecturers, and the decisions they supported were correspondingly concentrated in instructional, assessment, and feedback domains, while processes related to motivation, metacognition, emotions, and learning environments received far less support. These findings highlight an important gap: How can alternative forms of student data visibility, attentional guidance, and interface design support lecturer decisions?

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education
Published
2026-09-09
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-026-00623-8
Primary Topic
Online Learning and Analytics
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
article

AI-Supported lecturer decision-making in higher education: a socio-technical perspective

Alexander Steinmaurer, Sebastian Dennerlein, Robert Weinhandl, Philipp Wintersberger et al.
International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education
Online Learning and Analytics
article

AI-Supported lecturer decision-making in higher education: a socio-technical perspective

Alexander Steinmaurer, Sebastian Dennerlein, Robert Weinhandl, Philipp Wintersberger, Jonas Mayrhofer, Melike Nur Köroğlu
article en

Abstract

Abstract Artificial intelligence (AI) has become an integral part of teaching and learning in higher education. Through its capacity to generate actionable insights from student data, AI systems provide new opportunities to support lecturers’ decision-making. However, it remains unclear how AI systems support and mediate lecturer decision-making across different decision types. Existing research has primarily focused on technical capabilities and learning outcomes, while paying limited attention to the socio-technical dynamics of AI-supported lecturer decision-making. To address this gap, this study develops an empirically grounded taxonomy of AI-supported lecturer decision-making and maps the relationships among decision types, AI systems, student data, and learning outcomes. Following PRISMA guidelines, a systematic literature review of 27 empirical studies published between 2016 and 2025 was conducted using qualitative content analysis. The findings identify eight lecturer decision types and show that AI support is concentrated in instructional, feedback, and assessment decisions, while emotional, ethical, administrative, curriculum, and learning-environment decisions remain underrepresented. Learning Analytics Dashboards were the most frequently reported system type, primarily supporting monitoring, feedback, and assessment functions based on textual and log data. From a socio-technical perspective, the AI systems described in this sample predominantly made behavioral student data visible and actionable for lecturers, and the decisions they supported were correspondingly concentrated in instructional, assessment, and feedback domains, while processes related to motivation, metacognition, emotions, and learning environments received far less support. These findings highlight an important gap: How can alternative forms of student data visibility, attentional guidance, and interface design support lecturer decisions?

International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher EducationVol. 23(1)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 5%
Online Learning and Analytics
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.