One in four students said they are less likely to apply to institutions using AI for application assessment.
One in four students said they are less likely to apply to institutions using AI for application assessment.
IDP’s Emerging Futures 4 survey from July through August once again uncovered student attitudes towards artificial intelligence in study abroad planning and admissions processing.
The findings, which were based on the responses of more than 10,000 students and presented at the Canadian Bureau for International Education (CBIE) conference in Vancouver, offer both optimism and a word of caution for education institutions.
A significant finding from the survey is that a substantial portion of students (41%) anticipate universities employing machine learning tools for assessing admissions applications. This expectation reflects a growing awareness among students of AI’s burgeoning role in higher education.
The integration of AI in admissions processes symbolizes a transformative shift, hinting at a future where technological sophistication intertwines with traditional educational practices.
However, the survey also reveals apprehensive undercurrents. Approximately 24% of students expressed a likelihood of deterrence from applying to institutions using AI for application assessment. This percentage decreases to 14% if AI is used in tandem with human decision-making in the final admissions process.
This data highlights a crucial aspect of student psychology: the desire for a human element in critical decision-making processes, underscoring the need for a balanced human-AI interface in admissions.
The survey also taps into student perceptions of fairness and potential bias in AI-driven processes. About 35% of respondents believe that AI could enhance fairness in admissions, suggesting an appreciation for the objective, data-driven approach AI offers.
Conversely, a similar proportion (31%) fears the introduction of bias, reflecting concerns over algorithmic transparency and the ethical dimensions of AI in education. This dichotomy of views accentuates the complex nature of AI integration in educational settings, where technological efficacy must be balanced against ethical considerations.
Despite the technological advancements, the survey distinctly highlights the enduring importance of human advice in study abroad planning. Students continue to value human input at critical junctures, such as making admission applications, shortlisting institutions, and finalizing their study destinations. This preference underscores the irreplaceable nature of human experience, empathy, and personalized guidance in the educational journey.
Interestingly, nearly half of the respondents anticipate using AI tools to select their programs and institutions. This self-directed application of AI reflects a proactive approach by students in harnessing technology for personalized educational planning. It also signals a growing digital literacy and comfort with AI among the student population.
The Emerging Futures 4 survey findings necessitate a reevaluation by educational institutions regarding their use of AI. There is an evident need for transparency in AI applications, particularly in admissions processes. Institutions must ensure that students understand how their information is processed by AI and how decisions are reached. This transparency is not just a matter of ethical responsibility but also a strategic imperative to maintain trust and attract prospective students.
IDP’s Emerging Futures 4 survey offers a nuanced understanding of student perspectives on the use of AI in higher education. While there is an acknowledgment of AI’s potential benefits, concerns over fairness, bias, and the lack of a human touch remain prevalent.
For educational institutions, these insights are invaluable for strategizing the integration of AI in a manner that is both technologically advanced and ethically sound, ensuring that AI serves as a facilitator rather than a barrier in the pursuit of education.
The findings urge a future where AI complements, rather than replaces, the human elements of empathy, judgment, and personalized guidance in education.
