Artificial intelligence application in higher education: Opportunities and challenges

Purpose: to reveal problems and opportunities created by the application of artificial intelligence (AI) in higher education, based on perception of teachers and students.
Methods: the research is based on the comparative analysis of scientific articles and the authors’ survey of 380 teachers and students of the University of Tyumen. The following indices are calculated and applied: the readiness of the educational system for the spread of AI; the negative consequences of AI for students; the desirability of applying educational technologies using AI. The F and chi-square criteria are used to test hypotheses and compare groups.
Results: dissonance is revealed in the assessments, forecasts and expectations of teachers and students regarding the incorporation of AI technologies in higher education. The actors of education consider that the educational system is insufficiently prepared for the prevalence of AI. Teachers give even more critical judgments than students. Students are more likely to notice a potential deterioration in interaction with teachers, while the teachers expect clearer regulations and principles of its use. Negative assessments of the impact of AI on students' critical thinking, motivation, and communication skills prevail. The decrease in the effectiveness of traditional approaches to the organization of the learning environment is shown. A discrepancy is found between official declarations on the incorporation of AI and actual practices of its use.
Conclusions and Relevance: the integration of AI into higher education is challenged by the systemic unpreparedness of universities, which creates risks of chaotic implementation and a decrease in the quality of education. It is necessary to develop clear, disciplineoriented principles for the use of AI, which will preserve the developing function of education. Managerial influence should combine normative regulation, engagement of the most interested actors, and the promotion of a culture of sensible AI use.

1. Levashov V.K., Grebnyak O.V. Expension of Artificial Intelligence: expectations and attitudes of citizens. Sociological Studies. 2024; (12):13–23. EDN: https://elibrary.ru/xmndbl. https://doi.org/10.31857/S0132162524120022 (In Russ.)

2. Yakovenko А.V. Man and society – through the prism of Artificial Intelligence. Sociological Studies. 2024; (3):135–144. EDN: https://elibrary.ru/subbva. https://doi.org/10.31857/S0132162524030113 (In Russ.)

3. Glukhikh V.A., Eliseev S.M., Kirsanova N.P. Artificial Intelligence as a problem of modern sociology. Discourse. 2022; 8(1):82–93. EDN: https://elibrary.ru/npnigw. https://doi.org/10.32603/2412-8562-2022-8-1-82-93 (In Russ.)

4. Miao F., Shiohira K., Lao N. AI competency framework for students. Paris: UNESCO, 2024. 80 p. https://doi.org/10.54675/JKJB9835 (In Eng.)

5. Floridi L., Cowls J. A unified framework of five principles for AI in society. Harvard Data Science Review. 2019; 1(1). https://doi.org/10.1162/99608f92.8cd550d1 (In Eng.)

6. Alekseev S.A., Nikitina Т.Н. Methodological foundations of the sociology of Artificial Intelligence. The Review of Economy, the Law and Sociology. 2024; (4):219–223. EDN: https://elibrary.ru/eejvxt. https://doi.org/10.24412/1998-5533-2024-4-219-223 (In Russ.)

7. Barrett A., Pack A. Not quite eye to A.I.: student and teacher perspectives on the use of generative artificial intelligence in the writing process. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education. 2023; 20:59. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-023-00427-0 (In Eng.)

8. Giray L. Educators who do not use AI will be replaced by those who do: disadvantages of not embracing AI in medical education. Journal of the Practice of Cardiovascular Sciences. 2024; 10(1):43–47. https://doi.org/10.4103/jpcs.jpcs_19_24 (In Eng.)

9. Zhai C., Wibowo S., Li L.D. The effects of over-reliance on AI dialogue systems on students' cognitive abilities: a systematic review. Smart Learning Environments. 2024; 11:28. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-024-00316-7 (In Eng.)

10. Trinitatskaya O.G., Bocharov S.V., Nazarchuk O.A., Zakharova L.G. Effective management of innovative activities as a factor in the modernization of an educational institution. World of Science. Pedagogy and psychology. 2021; 19(1). EDN: https://elibrary.ru/uubbsp (In Russ.)

11. Buyakova K.I., Dmitriev Ya.A., Ivanova A.S., Feshchenko A.V., Yakovleva K.I. Students’ and teachers’ attitudes towards the use of tools with generative Artificial Intelligence at the university. Education and Science Journal. 2024; 26(7):160–193. EDN: https://elibrary.ru/bseuwy. https://doi.org/10.17853/1994-5639-2024-7-160-193 (In Russ.)

12. Tolchinskaya M.N. Modern technologies in higher education. Actual Issues of the Modern Economy. 2020; (2):74–79. EDN: https://elibrary.ru/jpvsim. https://doi.org/10.34755/IROK.2020.80.13.116 (In Russ.)

13. Pikhart M., Al-Obaydi L.H. Reporting the potential risk of using AI in higher education: subjective perspectives of educators. Computers in Human Behavior Reports. 2025; 18:100693. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chbr.2025.100693 (In Eng.)

14. Ananin D.P., Komarov R.V., Remorenko I.M. “When honesty is good, for imitation is bad”: strategies for using generative Artificial Intelligence in Russian higher education institutions. Higher Education in Russia. 2025; 34(2):31–50. EDN: https://elibrary.ru/obdxtg. https://doi.org/10.31992/0869-3617-2025-34-2-31-50 (In Russ.)

15. Rezaev A.V., Stepanov A.M., Tregubova N.D. Higher education in the age of Artificial Intelligence. Higher Education in Russia. 2024; 33(4):49–62. EDN: https://elibrary.ru/olnrfa. https://doi.org/10.31992/0869-3617-2024-33-4-49-62 (In Russ.)

16. Garkusha N.S., Gorodova J.S. Pedagogical opportunities of ChatGPT for developing cognitive activity of students. Vocational Education and Labour Market. 2023; 11(1(52)):6–23. EDN: https://elibrary.ru/nbbirg. https://doi.org/10.52944/PORT.2023.52.1.001 (In Russ.)

17. Mygal V., Mygal G., Mygal S. Cognitive and heuristic modeling of reality, developing innovative thinking: a semiotic approach to training an individual. The Educational Review. 2024; 8(11):1379–1392. https://doi.org/10.26855/er.2024.11.017 (In Eng.)

18. Gut Ju.N., Tursunov L.E., Lanskikh M.V., Akhmedova Sh.B. Development of innovative activity of university teachers: philosophical and psychological perspectives. Higher Education in Russia. 2024; 33(1):149–163. EDN: https://elibrary.ru/vhgmzr. https://doi.org/10.31992/0869-3617-2024-33-1-149-163 (In Russ.)

19. Ivanova N.L., Popova E.P. Professionals and the problem of implementing innovation in university. Educational Studies Moscow. 2017; (1):184–206. EDN: https://elibrary.ru/yhzcul. https://doi.org/10.17323/1814-9545-2017-1-184-206 (In Russ.)

20. Il’inykh S.A., Mikhailova E.V. Innovations in organizations: introduction and resistance. Sociological Studies. 2015; (6(374)):86–90. EDN: https://elibrary.ru/uaxufv (In Russ.)

21. Tyurina Y.A. Investigation of national education within activity approach in sociology. Sociology of Power. 2009; (2):93–101. EDN: https://elibrary.ru/kvdomj (In Russ.)

22. Vieriu A.M., Petrea G. The impact of Artificial Intelligence (AI) on students’ academic development. Educational Sciences. 2025; 15(3):343. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15030343 (In Eng.)

23. Sysoyev P.V. Ethics and AI-plagiarism in an academic environment: students’ understanding of compliance with author’s ethics and the problem of plagiarism in the process of interaction with generative Artificial Intelligence. Higher Education in Russia. 2024; 33(2):31–53. EDN: https://elibrary.ru/vtaiuo. https://doi.org/10.31992/0869-3617-2024-33-2-31-53 (In Russ.)

24. Al-Zahrani A.M. Unveiling the shadows: beyond the hype of AI in education. Heliyon. 2024; 10(9):e30696. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e30696 (In Eng.)

25. Seo K., Tang J., Roll I., Fels S., Yoon D. The impact of artificial intelligence on learner–instructor interaction in online learning. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education. 2021; 18:54. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-021-00292-9 (In Eng.)

26. Kamneva E.V., Prjazhnikov N.S., Babanova E.V., Buyanova S.M. Iimitation of personal and professional responsibility under the terms of the directives. Herald of Omsk University. Series: Psychology. 2020; (4):27–41. EDN: https://elibrary.ru/ddggso. https://doi.org/10.24147/2410-6364.2020.4.27-41 (In Russ.)

27. Arantes J. The SAMR model as a framework for scaffolding online chat: a theoretical discussion of the SAMR model as a research method during these “interesting” times. Qualitative Research Journal. 2022; 22(3):294–306. https://doi.org/10.1108/QRJ-08-2021-0088 (In Eng.)

28. Monninger M., Aggensteiner P.-M., Pollok T.M., Kaiser A., Reinhard I., Hermann A., Reichert M., Ebner-Priemer U.W., Meyer-Lindenberg A., Brandeis D., Banaschewski T., Holz N.E. The importance of high quality real-life social interactions during the COVID-19 pandemic. Scientific Reports. 2023; 13:3675. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-30803-9 (In Eng.)

29. De Felice S., Hamilton A.F. de C., Ponari M., Vigliocco G. Learning from others is good, with others is better: the role of social interaction in human acquisition of new knowledge. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society. 2023; 378(1870):20210357. http://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2021.0357 (In Eng.)

30. Guilherme A. AI and education: the importance of teacher and student relations. AI and Society. 2019; 34:47– 54. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-017-0693-8 (In Eng.)