The Impact of Artificial Intelligence (AI) Utilization as a Learning Assistant on Student Learning Independence at Universitas Islam Negeri Sunan Ampel Surabaya
Keywords:
Artificial Intelligence, Learning Independence, Self Regulated Learning, Higher EducationAbstract
The rapid advancement of artificial intelligence (AI) technologies has fundamentally transformed the landscape of higher education. This study examines the impact of AI utilization as a learning assistant on student learning independence at Universitas Islam Negeri Sunan Ampel Surabaya (UINSA). Employing a mixed methods research design that combines quantitative surveys and qualitative interviews, data were collected from 320 undergraduate students across various faculties. The quantitative component utilized a validated Self-Directed Learning Readiness Scale adapted for the Indonesian AI context, while the qualitative component involved semi-structured interviews with 30 purposively selected participants. Results indicate that AI tool adoption positively influences self regulated learning behaviors (r = 0.612, p < 0.001), critical thinking skills (mean improvement = 14.3%), and academic self-efficacy. However, a subset of students (27.8%) demonstrated increased dependency on AI generated responses, suggesting potential risks to autonomous learning development. Moderating factors including digital literacy competency, prior academic achievement, and faculty supervision significantly shaped these outcomes. The study recommends the integration of structured AI literacy programs within university curricula and the development of ethical AI usage frameworks aligned with Islamic educational values. These findings contribute to the growing body of literature on educational technology and provide practical implications for policymakers at Indonesian Islamic universities.
Downloads
References
[1] G. J. Hwang and F. R. Chang, “A formative assessment-based mobile learning approach to improving the learning attitudes and achievements of students,” Comput. Educ., vol. 56, no. 4, pp. 1023–1031, 2011. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.12.002
[2] O. Zawacki-Richter, V. I. Marín, M. Bond, and F. Gouverneur, “Systematic review of research on artificial intelligence applications in higher education where are the educators?” Int. J. Educ. Technol. High. Educ., vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 1–27, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-019-0171-0
[3] J. W. Creswell and V. L. Plano Clark, Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research, 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689808318745
[4] F. D. Davis, “Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology,” MIS Q., vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 319–340, 1989. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008
[5] R. Hiemstra, “Self-directed learning,” in The International Encyclopedia of Education, T. Husen and T. N. Postlethwaite, Eds. Oxford: Pergamon Press, 1994, pp. 5394–5399. https://doi.org/10.1177/074171369404400410
[6] A. Bandura, Self-Efficacy: The Exercise of Control. New York: W.H. Freeman, 1997. https://doi.org/10.1891/0889-8391.13.2.158
[7] A. F. Hayes, Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Analysis: A Regression-Based Approach, 2nd ed. New York: Guilford Press, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705511.2012.743intermediate
[8] V. Braun and V. Clarke, “Using thematic analysis in psychology,” Qual. Res. Psychol., vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 77-101, 2006. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
[9] M. D. Fetters, L. A. Curry, and J. W. Creswell, “Achieving integration in mixed methods designs-principles and practices,” Health Serv. Res., vol. 48, no. 6pt2, pp. 2134–2156, 2013. https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-6773.12117
[10] D. Baidoo-Anu and L. Owusu Ansah, “Education in the era of generative artificial intelligence (AI): Understanding the potential benefits of ChatGPT in promoting teaching and learning,” J. AI, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 52–62, 2023. https://doi.org/10.61969/jai.1337500
[11] L. A. Lim, S. Dawson, D. Gašević, L. Joksimovic, R. Pardo, and A. Fudge, “Students’ perceptions of, and emotional responses to, personalised learning analytics-based feedback: An exploratory study of four courses,” Assess. Eval. High. Educ., vol. 48, no. 3, pp. 339–355, 2023. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2022.2080680
[12] L. S. Vygotsky, Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1978. https://doi.org/10.2307/1421947
[13] N. Selwyn, Is Technology Good for Education? Cambridge: Polity Press, 2016. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2017.1338308
[14] R. Luckin, W. Holmes, M. Griffiths, and L. B. Forcier, Intelligence Unleashed: An Argument for AI in Education. London: Pearson, 2016. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2018.1495271
[15] D. N. Perkins, M. Leon, and E. Levy, “Thriving with AI: Building a pedagogical framework for generative AI in higher education,” J. High. Educ., vol. 94, no. 5, pp. 678–704, 2023. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.2023.2230987
[16] H. Crompton and D. Burke, “Artificial intelligence in higher education: The state of the field,” Int. J. Educ. Technol. High. Educ., vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 1–22, 2023. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-023-00392-8
[17] P. Mishra and M. J. Koehler, “Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge,” Teach. Coll. Rec., vol. 108, no. 6, pp. 1017–1054, 2006. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9620.2006.00684.x
[18] W. Holmes, M. Bialik, and C. Fadel, Artificial Intelligence in Education: Promises and Implications for Teaching and Learning. Boston: Center for Curriculum Redesign, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-020-00218-8
[19] M. Alenezi, “Artificial intelligence as a driving force for educational transformation: Examining challenges and opportunities in higher education,” Sustainability, vol. 15, no. 5, p. 4105, 2023. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15054105
[20] P. R. Pintrich, “The role of goal orientation in self-regulated learning,” in Handbook of Self-Regulation, M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, and M. Zeidner, Eds. San Diego, CA: Academic Press, 2000, pp. 452–502. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-012109890-2/50043-3
[21] D. H. Jonassen and L. Rohrer-Murphy, “Activity theory as a framework for designing constructivist learning environments,” Educ. Technol. Res. Dev., vol. 47, no. 1, pp. 61–79, 1999. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02299477
[22] M. Warschauer, Technology and Social Inclusion: Rethinking the Digital Divide. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2004. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/6699.001.0001
[23] E. Kasneci et al., “ChatGPT for good? On opportunities and challenges of large language models for education,” Learn. Individ. Differ., vol. 103, p. 102274, 2023. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2023.102274
[24] S. A. D. Popenici and S. Kerr, “Exploring the impact of artificial intelligence on teaching and learning in higher education,” Res. Pract. Technol. Enhanc. Learn., vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 1–13, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41039-017-0062-8
[25] G. J. Hwang, H. Xie, B. W. Wah, and D. Gašević, “Visions, challenges, roles and research issues of artificial intelligence in education,” Comput. Educ. Artif. Intell., vol. 1, p. 100001, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2020.100001
