Beyond Acceptance and Resistance: Digital Media Students’ Judgements of Generative AI Assistance and Perceived Creative Replacement

This study investigated how Digital Media students judged acceptable and problematic forms of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) involvement in creative learning. An embedded mixed-methods analysis examined 48 completed and consented baseline survey responses from an accessible population of 120 students at an Australian university. Forty-seven responses were valid for most Likert items, with qualitative content analysis of 37 benefit responses and 41 concern responses. Participants identified potential value in troubleshooting, coding support, grammar checking, information organisation, and error identification. They reported concern about AI-system training practices (93.6%), reduced employment opportunities (89.4%), the ethical acceptability of AI-supported coursework (83.0%), environmental effects (80.9%), and possible reductions in creative-skill development (76.6%). These percentages represent perceived risks, not demonstrated outcomes. Integration indicated that respondents differentiated bounded technical, corrective, and organisational assistance from GenAI involvement perceived to displace ideation, research, planning, understanding, or capability-building practice. Conditional legitimacy is proposed as a provisional framework linking delegated function, retained capability-building activity, learner agency and responsibility, and ethical and professional acceptability. The contribution is a student-informed account of the criteria underlying the assistance–perceived replacement distinction in Digital Media education.