Skip to main content
Articles | Acta Pedagogia Asiana | Volume 5 - Issue 1 - 2026 | 73-84 | https://doi.org/10.53623/apga.v5i1.955
© 2026 by the author(s), and is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) License Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) License

University Lecturers’ and Students’ Perceptions and Use of Genai Technologies

Author(s): Chen Zheng 1 , Kee Chye Leo 2 ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0007-6926-4310 , Rachel Sheffield 3 ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2385-6381 , Nicole Fairhurst 3 ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7886-2282
Author(s) information:
1 Faculty of Business and Law, Curtin University Perth, Australia
2 Curtin Business School Curtin University Singapore
3 Faculty of Education Curtin University, Perth, Australia

Corresponding author

Acta Pedagogia Asiana

Volume 5 - Issue 1 - 2026

 About the journal
Submit your article

ChatGPT, Bard, and other generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) technologies, also known as conversational AI or chatbots, were trained to be informative and comprehensive. This definition described the capacity of GenAI to answer, create, and complete tasks, such as writing essay responses using user-generated prompts. Universities were often unsure of how to incorporate this technology into the teaching and learning process in a consistent and ethical manner. There was debate about the positive and negative aspects of GenAI within universities, such as prompt feedback and resource development, versus breaches of academic integrity. The inconsistencies in messaging and debates led both academics and students to feel anxious, confused, and concerned. This project explored the expertise, confidence, and subsequent experiences of university students and academics with the use of GenAI technologies in their teaching, learning, and assessment. It employed a mixed-methods approach, combining a quantitative survey with qualitative interviews conducted across international campuses of a large public university, with a sample of 132 students and 38 staff. GenAI had the potential to enhance productivity and efficiency in education; however, further support and clarification were needed to foster the development of critical skills for evaluating information output and the ethical use of these technologies.

Read Full-Text
Previous article
Next article

Lo, C.K. (2023). What is the impact of ChatGPT on education? A rapid review of the literature. Education Sciences, 3, 410. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13040410.

Ivanov, S.; Soliman, M. (2023). Game of algorithms: ChatGPT implications for the future of tourism, education and research. Journal of Tourism Futures, 9, 214–221. https://doi.org/10.1108/JTF-02-2023-0016.

Sullivan, M.; Kelly, A.; McLaughlan, P. (2023). ChatGPT in higher education: Considerations for academic integrity and student learning. Journal of Applied Learning and Teaching, 6, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.37074/jalt.2023.6.1.7

Cassidy, C. (2023). Lecturer detects bot-use in one-fifth of assessments as concerns mount over AI in exams. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/jan/17/lecturer-detects-bot-use-in-one-fifth-of-assessments-as-concerns-mount-over-ai-in-exams.

Loh, E. (2023). ChatGPT and generative AI chatbots: Challenges and opportunities for science, medicine and medical leaders. BMJ Leader, 0, 1–4. https://doi.org/10.1136/leader-2023-000836.

Chan, C.K.Y.; Hu, W. (2023). Students’ voices on generative AI: Perceptions, benefits, and challenges in higher education. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 20, 43. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-023-00406-1.

Braun, V.; Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3, 77–103. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa.

Creswell, J.W.; Guetterman, T.C. (2019). Educational Research: Planning, Conducting and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research. Pearson Education Limited.

Nowell, L.; Norris, J.; White, D.; Moules, N. (2017). Thematic analysis: Striving to meet the trustworthiness criteria. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 16. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406917733847.

Read Full-Text
About this article

SUBMITTED: 08 December 2025
ACCEPTED: 11 January 2026
PUBLISHED: 19 January 2026
SUBMITTED to ACCEPTED: 35 days
DOI: https://doi.org/10.53623/apga.v5i1.955

Cite this article
Zheng, C. ., Leo, K. C. ., Sheffield, R. ., & Fairhurst, N. . (2026). University Lecturers’ and Students’ Perceptions and Use of Genai Technologies . Acta Pedagogia Asiana, 5(1), 73–84. https://doi.org/10.53623/apga.v5i1.955
Keywords
GenAI technology perceptions GenAI tertiary usage GenAI ethics
Accessed
62
Citations
0
Share this article