Page 11 - IJSA, Vol. 7, No 1, 2024

International Journal of Science Annals, Vol. 7, No. 1, 2024
рrint ISSN: 2617-2682; online ISSN: 2707-3637; DOI:10.26697/ijsa

Introduction
Society has entered an era of digitalisation. This has The questionnaire was available on the official website
opened up new perspectives for the study and use of of the Scientific Research Institute KRPOCH using
artificial intelligence (Pypenko, 2019). The higher Google Forms
education industry is one of the first sectors of human (https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSeu0HZ
endeavour to embark on digital transformation W1t7I5guMH7M_FcTDizHxnpU-
(Shenkoya & Kim, 2023). The number of studies and OvPMU1_lCfPF_K9y6g/viewform). The questionnaire
publications on the use of artificial intelligence (AI) in was also made available to potential participants on
higher education has increased two to three times in the social networking sites such as Facebook, LinkedIn, etc.
last five years compared to previous years (Bearman et A selective individualised online interview was also
al., 2023; Chu et al., 2022; Crompton & Burke, 2023). conducted with survey participants, when it was
The advent of chatbots based on artificial intelligence necessary to clarify their answers and/or determine the
(AI chatbots) and specialised in text (Large Language specifics of their use of AI chatbots.
Models) has been a catalyst and a major factor in Statistical analyses were performed using SPSS 28.0.1
revolutionising higher education. These changes are in software. Descriptive statistics using frequencies, means
progress at this moment. The changes affect all elements and standard deviations were used to analyze the data
of the higher education system and all stakeholders collected. Cronbach’s alpha was used to assess internal
involved in the process. Today, we are seeing a boom in consistency. Cronbach’s alpha was 0.837. This meets
the use of various AI-based chatbots by faculty and internal consistency requirements (α>0.7).
students in the educational process.
As a result, many new questions arise about the Results
legitimacy of using AI and adhering to ethical standards The questionnaire developed consisted of six questions.
when using AI chatbots in education and science It was used to gather information about the possibilities
(Melnyk & Pypenko, 2023). Therefore, there is an of using AI chatbots in higher education. The
obvious need to study the influence and role of AI in the questionnaire consisted of an instruction sheet
research and teaching activities of professors and the explaining the purpose and conditions of the study and
learning activities of university students. six questions, of which three questions characterised the
The aim of the study. To explore practices and identify respondent (gender, status, country) and three questions
trends in the use of artificial intelligence-based chatbots related to the purpose of the study.
by stakeholders in higher education. To explore how stakeholders are using AI chatbots in
higher education, the following general questions apply:
Materials and Methods A. Does your college/university use hybrid learning
The study was conducted among 363 students (175 (face-to-face / distance learning)?
males and 188 females) and 425 university faculty (198 B. Do you use artificial intelligence-based chatbots to
males and 227 females) from 57 countries between prepare for classes or complete assignments at your
January and April 2024. The probability sampling college/university?
method (randomly generated) was used to survey faculty C. Do you edit the results returned by generative
working in hybrid modes in higher education. A similar chatbots at your request?
method was used to survey students who were studying The questions involved the choice of one of the answer
synchronous contact and distance learning or options “yes” or “no”.
asynchronous distance learning. The survey was The key findings of the study on the use of artificial
voluntary. Participation was anonymous. Respondents intelligence-based chatbots by higher education
were interviewed online. stakeholders are summarized in Tables 1–3.

Table 1
Comparative Characteristics of the Use of Hybrid (Face-to-Face/Distance) Learning by Higher Education Stakeholders

Higher Answer to question A Total
education Positive Negative
stakeholders people % people % people %
Students 315 86.8 48 13.2 363 100.0
Male 141 38.8 34 9.4 175 48.2
Female 174 47.9 14 3.9 188 51.8
Faculty 353 83.1 72 16.9 425 100.0
Male 178 41.9 20 4.7 198 46.6
Female 175 41.2 52 12.2 227 53.4
Total 668 84.8 120 15.2 788 100.0
Male 319 40.5 54 6.9 373 47.3
Female 349 44.3 66 8.4 415 52.7

9