Students’ voices on generative AI: perceptions, benefits, and challenges in higher education
Abstract This study explores university students’ perceptions of generative AI (GenAI) technologies, such as ChatGPT, in higher education, focusing on familiarity, their willingness to engage, potential benefits and challenges, and effective integration. A survey of 399 undergraduate and postgraduate students from various disciplines in Hong Kong revealed a generally positive attitude towards GenAI in teaching and learning. Students recognized the potential for personalized learning support, wri
Record details
Published: 16 July 2023
Source: OpenAlex
Category: Research
Topics: Children & education
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.
Shaping the Future of Education: Exploring the Potential and Consequences of AI and ChatGPT in Educational Settings
OpenAlex · 7 July 2023
Transformative effects of ChatGPT on modern education: Emerging Era of AI Chatbots
OpenAlex · 19 June 2023
New Era of Artificial Intelligence in Education: Towards a Sustainable Multifaceted Revolution
OpenAlex · 16 August 2023
Analyzing the role of ChatGPT as a writing assistant at higher education level: A systematic review of the literature
OpenAlex · 22 August 2023
Challenges and Opportunities of Generative AI for Higher Education as Explained by ChatGPT
OpenAlex · 23 August 2023
The impact of Generative AI (GenAI) on practices, policies and research direction in education: a case of ChatGPT and Midjourney
OpenAlex · 4 September 2023
How to cite this record
ethics.ai (16 July 2023), “Students’ voices on generative AI: perceptions, benefits, and challenges in higher education,” evidence record 9271, https://ethics.ai/record/9271 (originally published by OpenAlex).
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.