GenAI in private higher education: Student insights by gender, study level, and delivery mode
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.38140/ijer-2025.vol7.2.08Keywords:
Awareness, generative artificial intelligence, gender, private higher education, studentsAbstract
As generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) tools gain importance in higher education, understanding how different student groups engage with these technologies is essential for equitable integration. This study investigates the perceived differences in awareness, use, and benefits of GenAI and reference management tools across gender, level of study (undergraduate vs. postgraduate), and mode of delivery (contact, part-time, distance) in five private higher education institutions (PHEIs) in South Africa. Following a quantitative research approach, a total of 1,866 students participated in a structured, Likert-scale questionnaire distributed via MS Forms. Based on Pearson’s chi-square test and the chi-square goodness-of-fit test, significant differences emerged across genders, modes of delivery, and study levels. Female students were more likely to use GenAI for paraphrasing and grammar support, while male students engaged more with tools for coding, image generation, and mathematics. Postgraduate and part-time students reported higher perceived benefits, particularly in terms of efficiency and academic support, while distance students consistently reported lower perceived value and confidence in usage. The results support the need for targeted AI literacy interventions, particularly for female students and those in distance learning, as well as training that aligns with specific fields and tasks. These differences highlight the urgent need for targeted AI literacy initiatives and pedagogical interventions that address structural inequities in private higher education settings.
References
Almassaad, A., Alajlan, H., & Alebaikan, R. (2024). Student perceptions of generative artificial intelligence: Investigating utilisation, benefits, and challenges in higher education. Systems, 12(10), 385. https://doi.org/10.3390/systems12100385
Armutat, S., Wattenberg, M., & Mauritz, N. (2024). Artificial intelligence – Gender-specific differences in perception, understanding, and training interest. International Conference on Gender Research. https://doi.org/10.34190/icgr.7.1.2163
Arowosegbe, A., Alqahtani, J. S., & Oyelade, T. (2024). Perception of generative AI use in UK higher education. Frontiers in Education, 9. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2024.1463208
Al-Zahrani, A. M. (2024). Balancing act: Exploring the interplay between human judgement and artificial intelligence in problem-solving, creativity, and decision-making. IgMin Research, 2(3), 145–158. https://doi.org/10.61927/igmin158
Bouzar, A., El Idrissi, K., & Ghourdou, T. (2024). Gender differences in perceptions and usage of ChatGPT. International Journal of Humanities and Educational Research. https://doi.org/10.47832/2757-5403.25.32
Brown, R. D., Sillence, E., & Branley-Bell, D. (2024). AcademAI: Investigating AI usage, attitudes, and literacy in higher education and research. https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/64ahx
Chaka, C., Shange, T., Nkhobo, T., & Hlatshwayo, V. (2024). An environmental review of the generative artificial intelligence policies and guidelines of South African higher education institutions: A content analysis. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 23(12), 487–511. https://doi.org/10.26803/ijlter.23.12
Chan, C. K. Y., & Hu, W. (2023). Students’ voices on generative AI: Perceptions, benefits, and challenges in higher education [Manuscript submitted for publication]. ResearchGate. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/374398598
Chanda, T., Sain, Z., Yusuf, R. D., Shogbesan, O., Vinandi, T. H., Wisdom, T. H., & Akpan, W. (2024). Ethical implications of AI and machine learning in education: A systematic analysis. International Journal of Instructional Technology (IJIT), 3(1), 1–13.
Currie, G. M. (2023). Academic integrity and artificial intelligence: Is ChatGPT hype, hero, or heresy? Seminars in Nuclear Medicine, 53(5), 719–730. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.semnuclmed.2023.04.008
Davis, F. D. (1989). Technology acceptance model: TAM. In M. N. Al-Suqri & A. S. Al-Aufi (Eds.), Information seeking behavior and technology adoption (pp. 205-219). IGI Global.
Davis, R. (2025, April 5). CheatGPT - SA universities faced with a burgeoning degree of AI-written academic assignments. Daily Maverick. https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/article/2025-04-05-cheatgpt-crisis-sa-universities-faced-with-a-burgeoning-degree-of-ai-written-academic-assignments/
Denecke, K., Glauser, R., & Reichenpfader, D. (2023). Assessing the potential and risks of AI-based tools in higher education: Results from an eSurvey and SWOT analysis. Trends in Higher Education, 2(4), 667–688. https://doi.org/10.3390/higheredu2040039
Draxler, F., Buschek, D., Tavast, M., Hämäläinen, P., Schmidt, A., Kulshrestha, J., & Welsch, R. (2023). Gender, age, and technology education influence the adoption and appropriation of LLMs. arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2310.06556
Dzhanegizova, A., Nurseiit, A. M., & Vyborova, K. S. (2024). Artificial intelligence in education: Analysis of dynamics, perception, and prospects for integration. https://doi.org/10.58732/2958-7212-2023-4-34-49
Elshaer, I. A., et al. (2024). Disciplinary differences in undergraduate students' engagement with generative artificial intelligence. Smart Learning Environments, 11(1), 51. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-024-00251-0
Elshami, W., Al Kawas, S., Abuzaid, M., & Ibrahim, H. (2024). Students’ knowledge and perceptions towards artificial intelligence in healthcare. BMC Medical Education, 24(1), 134. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-024-04838-5
Fošner, A. (2024). University students’ attitudes and perceptions towards AI tools: Implications for sustainable educational practices. Sustainability, 16(19), 8668. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16198668
Gasaymeh, A.-M. M., Beirat, M., & Abu Qbeita, A. A. (2024). University students’ insights of generative artificial intelligence (AI) writing tools. Education Sciences, 14(10), 1062. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14101062
Gesser-Edelsburg, A., Hijazi, R., Eliyahu, E., & Tal, A. (2024). Bridging the divide: An empirical investigation of artificial intelligence and generative artificial intelligence integration across genders, disciplines and academic roles. The European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning.https://doi.org/10.2478/eurodl-2024-0008
Ghanem, O. A., Hagag, A. M., Kormod, M. E., El-Refaay, M. A., Khedr, A. M., Abozaid, O. M., Abdelmoaty, K. M., & Hamed, M. S. (2025). Medical students’ knowledge, attitudes, and practices toward generative artificial intelligence in Egypt 2024: A cross-sectional study.BMC Medical Education, 25(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-025-07329-x
Guillén-Yparrea, N. (2024). Unveiling generative AI in higher education: Insights from engineering students and professors. https://doi.org/10.1109/educon60312.2024.10578876
Günay, M. (2025). Artificial intelligence and originality in design. ART/Icle Sanat ve Tasar?m Dergisi, 4(3), 449–469. https://doi.org/10.56590/stdarticle.1548924
Higher Education Policy Institute (HEPI). (2024). Students’ use of generative AI is surging – and most don’t tell their tutors when they use it. Higher Education Policy Institute. https://www.hepi.ac.uk
Iddrisu, H. M., Iddrisu, S. A., & Aminu, B. (2025). Gender differences in the adoption, usage, and perceived effectiveness of AI writing tools. International Journal of Educational Innovation and Research, 4(1), 110–111. https://doi.org/10.31949/ijeir.v4i1.11717
Iñaki, A., Olivier, A., Doerr, S., Gambacorta, L., & Oliviero, T. (2024). The gen AI gender gap.Economics Letters, 241, 111814. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econlet.2024.111814
International Centre for Academic Integrity. (2018). The fundamental values of academic integrity (3rd ed.). Clemson University. https://academicintegrity.org/resources/fundamental-values
Khalifa, M., & Albadawy, M. (2024). Using artificial intelligence in academic writing and research: An essential productivity tool. Computer Methods and Programs in Biomedicine Update, 5(1), 100145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cmpbup.2024.100145
Malik, A. R., Pratiwi, Y., Andajani, K., Numertayasa, I. W., Suharti, S., Darwis, A., & Marzuki, N. (2023). Exploring artificial intelligence in academic essay: Higher education students’ perspective. International Journal of Educational Research Open, 5, 100296. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedro.2023.100296
Mashburn, P., Weuthen, F. A., Otte, N., Krabbe, H., Fernandez, G. M., Kraus, T., & Krabbe, J. (2025). Gender differences in the use of ChatGPT as generative artificial intelligence for clinical research and decision-making in occupational medicine. Healthcare, 13(12), 1394. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare1312139
Truong, N. M., Vo, T. Q., Tran, H. T. B., Nguyen, H. T., & Pham, V. N. H. (2023). Healthcare students’ knowledge, attitudes, and perspectives toward artificial intelligence in southern Vietnam. Heliyon, 9(12), 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e22653
Møgelvang, A., Bjelland, C., Grassini, S., & Ludvigsen, K. (2024). Gender differences in the use of generative artificial intelligence chatbots in higher education: Characteristics and consequences. Education Sciences, 14(12), 1363. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14121363
Nam, J. (2023). 56% of college students have used AI on assignments or exams. BestColleges. https://www.bestcolleges.com/research/most-college-students-have-used-ai-survey/
Noroozi, O., Soleimani Delfared, S., Farrokhnia, M., & Banihashem, S. K. (2024). Generative AI in education: Pedagogical, theoretical, and methodological perspectives. International Journal of Technology in Education, 7(3), 373–385. https://doi.org/10.46328/ijte.845
Nyaaba, M., Shi, L., Nabang, M., Zhai, X., Kyeremeh, P., Ayoberd, S. A., & Akanzire, B. N. (2024). Generative AI as a learning buddy and teaching assistant: Pre-service teachers’ uses and attitudes. arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2402.16622
Ofem, U. J., Iyam, M. A., Ovat, S. V., Nwogwugwu, C., Anake, P. M., Udeh, M. I., & Out, B. D. (2024). Artificial intelligence (AI) in academic research: A multi-group analysis of students’ awareness and perceptions using gender and programme type. Journal of Applied Learning and Teaching, 7(1). https://doi.org/10.37074/jalt.2024.7.1.9
POPIA. (2021). Protection of Personal Information Act (POPI Act). POPIA. https://popia.co.za/
Pramjeeth, S., & Ramgovind, P. (2024a). Generative artificial intelligence (AI) tools in higher education: A moral compass for the future? African Journal of Inter/Multidisciplinary Studies, 6(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.51415/ajims.v6i1.1560
Pramjeeth, S., & Ramgovind, P. (2024b). Reconceptualizing assessment design in the age of AI: Is it genuine or faux? New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1002/tl.20625
Sundet, M., Jansen, J., & Bakken, J. (2023). Gender differences in generative AI chatbot use in higher education: A survey of Norwegian students. Education Sciences, 13(12), 1363. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13121363
Strzelecki, A., & ElArabawy, S. (2024). Investigation of the moderation effect of gender and study level on the acceptance and use of generative AI by higher education students: Comparative evidence from Poland and Egypt. British Journal of Educational Technology. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13425
Vogels, E. A. (2023). Americans’ use of ChatGPT is ticking up, but few trust it – especially Republicans. Pew Research Center. https://www.pewresearch.org
Yadav, D., Jaiswal, P., Kumari, N., Jemini, I., Verma, Y., Tandon, S., & Srivastava, D. (2024). Knowledge, attitude, and practice regarding artificial intelligence (AI) and its usage in dental academic curricula among dental undergraduates and postgraduates. EPRA International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research, 154–165. https://doi.org/10.36713/epra17709
Yilmaz, R. M., & Yilmaz, F. G. K. (2022). Students' perceptions of data privacy in smart learning environments. Computers & Education, 180, 104443. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2022.104443
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
Copyright (c) 2025 Shamola Pramjeeth
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
