Understanding Student Attitudes and Acceptability of GenAI Tools in Higher Ed: Scale Development and Evaluation

Students have diverse views on GenAI acceptability based on their background: The study of 297 undergraduates found that male students and multilingual students rated GenAI use in writing tasks as more acceptable than their peers, suggesting that responsible AI policies need to account for different student perspectives rather than applying one-size-fits-all approaches.

First-year students show significantly higher societal concerns about GenAI: Newer students expressed greater worry about broader societal impacts of generative AI compared to upper-year students, which may indicate that institutions should prioritize educating incoming students about responsible AI use and societal implications early in their academic careers.

Students perceive unclear institutional policies on GenAI: The research identified "policy clarity" as a key attitudinal dimension, suggesting many students lack clear guidance on how their institutions expect them to use (or not use) GenAI tools—a gap that responsible AI integration must address through transparent institutional policies.

First-generation students see stronger career benefits from GenAI: This group reported a stronger belief that GenAI will impact their future careers, highlighting that responsible AI frameworks should consider how different student populations may experience different stakes and opportunities related to AI literacy and adoption.

A validated measurement tool now exists for tracking student AI attitudes: The study developed and tested a survey instrument across six thematic domains, providing institutions with a practical tool to systematically evaluate how their students perceive GenAI and whether educational interventions around responsible AI use are effective.