Practitioner Beliefs and Behaviors in AI-Enhanced Education: DOT Framework Survey Evidence
This study reports findings from a cross-sectional survey (n = 72) of higher education practitioners examining beliefs, behaviors, and institutional conditions related to artificial intelligence (AI) integration in teaching and learning. Grounded in the DOT Framework, which integrates design thinking and open systems theory, the study investigates AI familiarity, usage patterns, design-oriented practices, and pedagogical beliefs. Exploratory factor analysis of 19 belief items identified a three-
Record details
Published: 27 May 2026
Source: arXiv
Category: Research
Topics: Children & education · Finance, VC & PE
Retrieved: 14 July 2026
Related evidence
These records share source-supplied organisations, an exact publisher byline, automatic topics or regions. The reason is shown on every link; related does not mean supporting, agreeing with or verifying this record.
Rationalize: Shared Semantic Reasoning for Human-AI Alignment
arXiv · 28 May 2026
Engineering Students' Self-Efficacy, Perceptions, and Performance in a Flipped CS1 Course
arXiv · 31 May 2026
Leveraging BART to Assess CS1 C++ Programming Assignments using Rubric-based Criteria
arXiv · 2 June 2026
Faster Completion, Less Learning: Generative AI Reduced Study Time on Math Problems and the Knowledge They Build
arXiv · 20 May 2026
Knowing the Rules Is Not Enough: Student Regulatory Awareness and Use of GenAI in Higher Education
arXiv · 16 May 2026
Reimagining Assessment in the Age of Generative AI: Lessons from Open-Book Exams with ChatGPT
arXiv · 12 May 2026
How to cite this record
ethics.ai (27 May 2026), “Practitioner Beliefs and Behaviors in AI-Enhanced Education: DOT Framework Survey Evidence,” evidence record 3561, https://ethics.ai/record/3561 (originally published by arXiv).
Use and limitations
This page is a stable index and citation surface for a source record. ethics.ai did not author the underlying report and has not independently verified every claim. Automatic topics may be imperfect. For consequential use, quote and cite the original publisher.