Faculty assessment of generative AI’s impact on education and its associated risks

Introduction. Generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) offers new didactic opportunities, facilitating the shift from reproductive teaching methods to addressing problems of greater cognitive complexity. However, its successful integration into the educational process necessitates a pedagogical evaluation of the risks and expectations associated with changes in the educational environment. Aim. The present research aims to analyse the expectations of the pedagogical community regarding the transformation of the educational sphere resulting from the introduction of GenAI technologies. Methodology and research methods. Sociological and statistical methods were employed. The empirical basis comprised survey data collected in October 2025 from 356 faculty members at Russian universities. Results. The study revealed a significant level of expectation regarding the transformation of the educational system, reflecting educators’ readiness to embrace necessary changes. The majority of surveyed teachers – 83.1% – use GenAI in their professional activities. The main advantages of GenAI cited by teachers are the automation of routine tasks (83.1%), the creation of new forms of interaction (54.9%), and the acceleration of the learning process (42.8%). Among the key risks identified are a decline in cognitive abilities (80.8%), distortion and unreliability of information (68.5%), and ethical concerns (57.2%). Meanwhile, 42.8% of teachers anticipate significant changes in the education system within the next five years, and 34.9% expect very substantial changes. The analysis revealed a strong, statistically significant correlation between income and the use of GenAI (R = 0.770; p = 0.009): the higher the respondent’s income, the more likely they are to use GenAI regularly. Scientific novelty. The scientific novelty lies in the empirical identification of educators’ opinions concerning the transformation of the educational system resulting from the widespread adoption of GenAI, including an evaluation of the associated risks. For the first time, the relationship between experience in using GenAI and income has been assessed. Practical significance. The research findings may prove valuable to university administrators and government authorities in developing strategies for the use of GenAI in the educational process.

1. Tang K.S., Cooper G., Rappa N., Cooper M., Sims C., Nonis K. A dialogic approach to transform teaching, learning & assessment with generative AI in secondary education: a proof of concept. Pedagogies: An International Journal. 2024;19(3):493–503. doi:10.1080/1554480X.2024.2379774

2. Nikolopoulou K. Generative artificial intelligence in higher education: exploring ways of harnessing pedagogical practices with the assistance of ChatGPT. International Journal of Changes in Education. 2024;1(2):103–111. doi:10.47852/bonviewIJCE42022489

3. Alotaibi N.S., Alshehri A.H. Prospects and obstacles in using artificial intelligence in Saudi Arabia higher education institutions – the potential of AI-based learning outcomes. Sustainability. 2023;15(13):10723. doi:10.3390/su151310723

4. Alam A. Employing adaptive learning and intelligent tutoring robots for virtual classrooms and smart campuses: reforming education in the age of artificial intelligence. In: Shaw R.N., Das S., Piuri V., Bianchini M., eds. Advanced Computing and Intelligent Technologies, vol. 914. Singapore: Springer; 2022:395–406. doi:10.1007/978-981-19-2980-9_32

5. Pospelova E.A., Gorlacheva E.N., Ototsky P.L. Application of generative artificial intelligence in personalizing education: students’ perceptions across humanities and technical disciplines. Integraciya obrazovaniya = Integration of Education. 2025;29(4):734–752. (In Russ.) doi:10.15507/19919468.029.202504.734-752

6. Pospelova E.A. Optimization of cognitive load in students using generative artificial intelligence: updating Sweller’s theory. Mir psihologii = World of Psychology. 2025;(4):114–127. (In Russ.) doi:10.51944/20738528_2025_4_114

7. Wisniewski B., Zierer K., Hattie J. The power of feedback revisited: a meta-analysis of educational feedback research. Frontiers in Psychology. 2019;10:3087. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2019.03087

8. Rangel-De Lázaro G., Duart J.M. You can handle. You can teach it: systematic review on the use of extended reality and artificial intelligence technologies for online higher education. Sustainability. 2023;15(4):3507. doi:10.3390/su15043507

9. Crompton H., Burke D. Artificial intelligence in higher education: the state of the field. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education. 2023;20(1):22. doi:10.1186/s41239-02300392-8

10. Lo C.K. What is the impact of ChatGPT on education? A rapid review of the literature. Education Science. 2023;13:410. doi:10.3390/educsci13040410

11. Kong S.C., Cheung M.Y.W., Tsang O. Developing an artificial intelligence literacy framework: evaluation of a literacy course for senior secondary students using a project-based learning approach. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence. 2024;6:100214. doi:10.1016/j.caeai.2024.100214

12. Aslam M.S., Nisar S. Artificial Intelligence Applications Using ChatGPT in Education: Case Studies and Practices. IGI Global; 2023. 234 p. doi:10.4018/978-1-6684-9300-7

13. Crompton H., Burke D. Artificial intelligence in higher education: the state of the field. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education. 2023;20(1):22. doi:10.1186/s41239-02300392-8

14. Yusuf A., Bello S., Pervin N., Tukur A.K. Implementing a proposed framework for enhancing critical thinking skills in synthesizing AI-generated texts. Thinking Skills and Creativity. 2024;53:101619. doi:10.1016/j.tsc.2024.101619

15. Muthmainnah I.S., Ibna Seraj P.M., Oteir I. Playing with AI to investigate human-computer interaction technology and improving critical thinking skills to pursue 21st century age. Education Research International. 2022;1:17. doi:10.1155/2022/6468995

16. Wu R., Yu Zh. Do AI chatbots improve students’ learning outcomes? Evidence from a meta-analysis. British Journal of Educational Technology. 2024;55(1):10–33. doi:10.1111/bjet.13334

17. Darvishi A., Khosravi H., Sadiq S., Gašević D., Siemens G. Impact of AI assistance on student agency. Computers & Education. 2024;210:104967. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2023.104967

18. Awidi I.T. Comparing expert tutor evaluation of reflective essays with marking by generative artificial intelligence (AI) tool. Computers and Education Artificial Intelligence. 2024;6:100226. Accessed February 24, 2026. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666920X24000274?via%3Dihub

19. Del Gobbo E., Guarino A., Cafarelli B., et al. Automatic evaluation of open-ended questions for online learning: a systematic mapping. Studies in Educational Evaluation. 2023;77:101258. doi:10.1016/j.stueduc.2023.101258

20. Al-Mughairi H., Bhaskar P. Exploring the factors affecting the adoption of AI techniques in higher education: insights from teachers’ perspectives on ChatGPT. Journal of Research in Innovative Teaching & Learning. 2024;18(2):232–247. doi:10.1108/JRIT-09-2023-0129

21. Buyakova K.I., Dmitriev Y.A., Ivanova A.S., Feshchenko A.V., Yakovleva K.I. Students’ and instructors’ attitudes toward the use of artificial intelligence tools in higher education institutions. Obrazovanie i nauka = The Education and Science Journal. 2024;26(7):160–193. (In Russ.) doi:10.17853/1994-5639-2024-7-160-193

22. Cabellos B., de Aldama C., Pozo J.I. University teachers’ beliefs about the use of generative artificial intelligence for teaching and learning. Frontiers in Psychology. 2024;15:1468900. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1468900

23. Miranda F.J., Chamorro-Mera A. Exploring the adoption of generative artificial intelligence tools among university teachers. Higher Education Research & Development. 2026:45(3):680–696. doi:10.1080/07294360.2025.2559648

24. Miranda F.J., Chamorro-Mera A. The impact of gender and age on HEI teachers’ intentions to use generative artificial intelligence tools. Information Technologies and Learning Tools. 2025;108(4):112–128. doi:10.33407/itlt.v108i4.6046

25. Kohnke L., Ulla M.B. Embracing generative artificial intelligence: the perspectives of English instructors in Thai higher education institutions. Knowledge Management & E-Learning. 2024;16(4):654– 670. doi:10.34105/j.kmel.2024.16.030

26. Naidu K., Sevnarayan K. ChatGPT: an ever increasing encroachment of artificial intelligence in online assessment in distance education. Online Journal of Communication and Media Technologies. 2023;13(4):e202345. doi:10.30935/ojcmt/13291

27. Ananin D.P. Adoption of generative AI tools among academic and teaching staff: the role of experience and academic degree. Vysshee obrazovanie v Rossii = Higher Education in Russia. 2023;32(8):112–125. (In Russ.) doi:10.31992/0869-3617-2025-34-2-31-50

28. Rudenko E.S., Turyanskaya S.A. Generative artificial intelligence for teachers: strategies, tools, ethics. Pedagogicheskaja perspektiva = Pedagogical Perspective. 2025;(3):20–32. (In Russ.) doi:10.55523/27822559_2025_3(19)_20

29. Minakov A.I., Zenkina S.V. The attitude of future teachers towards the use of generative artificial intelligence in solving professional tasks. RUDN Journal of Informatization in Education. 2025;22(2):195–208. doi:10.22363/231286312025222195208

30. Dolinsky M.S. Directions for the use of generative artificial intelligence in introductory programming education at universities. Komp’yuternye instrumenty v obrazovanii = Computer Tools in Education. 2024;(2):85–96. (In Russ.) doi:10.32603/2071-2340-2024-2-85-96