Abstracts
Abstract
This exploratory case study provides an in-depth analysis of the potential of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) to enhance academic support in open and distance learning (ODL) systems. The study examined learner experiences with a GenAI-based academic support application in an online web publishing course over a semester, focusing on two phases: free use and structured use. Data were collected through semi-structured interviews and dialogue transcripts from 10 distance learners. Findings highlighted both continuity and transformation in learner practices. In both phases, GenAI was valued for time-saving and accurate responses aligned with course materials. Structured tasks in phase 2 encouraged more purposeful engagement, including systematic self-assessment and information verification. Despite technical challenges such as device incompatibility and occasional hallucinations, learners expressed motivation, satisfaction, and a demand for institutional integration. The results, while preliminary, suggest that GenAI-based academic support holds strong potential for broader implementation in large-scale open universities, offering a pathway to balancing quality, access, and cost in addressing the enduring challenges of mass higher education.
Keywords:
- generative AI,
- academic support,
- open and distance learning,
- learner experiences
Appendices
Bibliography
- Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. Longman. https://eduq.info/xmlui/handle/11515/18824
- Arun, K., Nagesh, A. S., & Ganga, P. (2019). A multi-model and AI-based CollegeBot management system (AICMS) for professional engineering colleges. International Journal of Innovative Technology and Exploring Engineering (IJITEE), 8(9), 2910–2914. https://doi.org/10.35940/ijitee.I8818.078919
- Bhullar, P. S., Joshi, M., & Chugh, R. (2024). ChatGPT in higher education—A synthesis of the literature and a future research agenda. Education and Information Technologies, 29(16), 21501–21522. https://doi.org/10.1007/S10639-024-12723-X
- Bloom, B. S. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals. Handbook I: Cognitive domain. Longmans.
- Bozkurt, A. (2024). Tell me your prompts and I will make them true: The alchemy of prompt engineering and generative AI. Open Praxis, 16(2), 111–118. https://doi.org/10.55982/openpraxis.16.2.661
- Choque-Diaz, M., Armas-Aguirre, J., & Shiguihara-Juarez, P. (2018). Cognitive technology model to enhance academic support services with chatbots. In Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE 25th International Conference on Electronics, Electrical Engineering and Computing, INTERCON 2018. IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/INTERCON.2018.8526411
- Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2021). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (6th ed.). Sage Publications.
- Daniel, J. (2004). Technology and education: Adventures in the eternal triangle. Commonwealth of Learning. https://oasis.col.org/
- Davar, N. F., Dewan, M. A. A., & Zhang, X. (2025). AI chatbots in education: Challenges and opportunities. Information, 16(3), Article 235. https://doi.org/10.3390/info16030235
- Demir, B., & Özdemir, D. (2025). AI voice journaling for future language teachers: A path to well-being through reflective practices. British Educational Research Journal. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1002/BERJ.4174
- Dewey, J. (1933). How we think: A restatement of the relation of reflective thinking to the educative progress. Henry Regnery Company. https://archive.org/details/howwethink0000unse/page/n3/mode/2up
- Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (1999). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 2(2–3), 87–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1096-7516(00)00016-6
- Gökoğlu, S., Yılmaz, F. G. K., & Yılmaz, R. (2024). Student engagement, Community of Inquiry, and transactional distance in online learning environments: A stepwise multiple linear regression analysis. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 25(4), 107–127. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v25i4.7660
- Gonsalves, C. (2024). Generative AI’s impact on critical thinking: Revisiting Bloom’s taxonomy. Journal of Marketing Education. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/02734753241305980
- Gunawardena, C. N., & Zittle, F. J. (1997). Social presence as a predictor of satisfaction within a computer–mediated conferencing environment. American Journal of Distance Education, 11(3), 8–26. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923649709526970
- Haindl, P., & Weinberger, G. (2024). Does ChatGPT help novice programmers write better code? Results from static code analysis. IEEE Access, 12, 114146–114156. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2024.3445432
- Hien, H. T., Cuong, P.-N., Nam, L. N. H., Nhung, H. L. T. K., & Thang, L. D. (2018). Intelligent assistants in higher-education environments: The FIT-EBot, a chatbot for administrative and learning support. In Y. Yagi, M. Bui, H. Q. Thang, & L. T. K. Oanh (Chairs), SoICT ’18: Proceedings of the 9th International Symposium on Information and Communication Technology (pp. 69–76). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/3287921.3287937
- Hmoud, M., Swaity, H., Hamad, N., Karram, O., & Daher, W. (2024). Higher education students’ task motivation in the generative artificial intelligence context: The case of ChatGPT. Information, 15(1), Article 33. https://doi.org/10.3390/INFO15010033
- Kandemir, B., & Kılıç Çakmak, E. (2024). Transactional distance’s influence on students’ social, cognitive, teaching presence, and academic achievement. American Journal of Distance Education, 39(4), 358–381. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923647.2024.2393490
- Karataş, F., & Yüce, E. (2024). AI and the future of teaching: Preservice teachers’ reflections on the use of artificial intelligence in open and distributed learning. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 25(3), 304–325. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v25i3.7785
- Kasneci, E., Sessler, K., Küchemann, S., Bannert, M., Dementieva, D., Fischer, F., Gasser, U., Groh, G., Günnemann, S., Hüllermeier, E., Krusche, S., Kutyniok, G., Michaeli, T., Nerdel, C., Pfeffer, J., Poquet, O., Sailer, M., Schmidt, A., Seidel, T., … Kasneci, G. (2023). ChatGPT for good? On opportunities and challenges of large language models for education. Learning and Individual Differences, 103, Article 102274. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.LINDIF.2023.102274
- Koçdar, S., Hamutoğlu, N. B., Erdoğdu, E., & Uçar, H. (2024). Academic performance of learners with special needs in open and distance learning: A study in Anadolu University open education system. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 40(3), 489–504. https://doi.org/10.1080/08856257.2024.2380594
- Lappalainen, Y., & Narayanan, N. (2023). Aisha: A custom AI library chatbot using the ChatGPT API. Journal of Web Librarianship, 17(3), 37–58. https://doi.org/10.1080/19322909.2023.2221477
- Li, K. C., Belawati, T., & Hou, H. (2025). Digital bridges and virtual scaffolds: Reimagining open and distance learning for 2025 and beyond [Editorial]. Asian Association of Open Universities Journal, 20(1), 1–3. https://doi.org/10.1108/AAOUJ-06-2025-178
- Lubbe, A., Marais, E., & Kruger, D. (2025). Cultivating independent thinkers: The triad of artificial intelligence, Bloom’s taxonomy and critical thinking in assessment pedagogy. Education and Information Technologies, 30, 17589–17622. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-025-13476-x
- Mandai, K., Tan, M. J. H., Padhi, S., & Pang, K. T. (2024). A cross-era discourse on ChatGPT’s influence in higher education through the lens of John Dewey and Benjamin Bloom. Education Sciences, 14(6), Article 614. https://doi.org/10.3390/EDUCSCI14060614
- Mejeh, M., & Rehm, M. (2024). Taking adaptive learning in educational settings to the next level: Leveraging natural language processing for improved personalization. Educational Technology Research and Development, 72(3), 1597–1621. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-024-10345-1
- Möller, M., Nirmal, G., Fabietti, D., Stierstorfer, Q., Zakhvatkin, M., Sommerfeld, H., & Schütt, S. (2024). Revolutionising distance learning: A comparative study of learning progress with AI-driven tutoring (arXiv:2403.14642). ArXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2403.14642
- Moore, M. G. (1989). Editorial: Three types of interaction. American Journal of Distance Education, 3(2), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923648909526659
- Moore, M. G., & Kearsley, G. (2012). Distance education: A systems view of online learning (3rd ed.). Cengage Learning.
- Murad, D. F., Fernando, E., Irsan, M., Murad, S. A., Akhirianto, P. M., & Wijaya, M. H. (2019). Learning support system using Chatbot in “Kejar C Package” homeschooling program. In A. Setyanto (Ed.), 2019 International Conference on Information and Communications Technology (pp. 32–37). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICOIACT46704.2019.8938479
- Park, Y., & Doo, M. Y. (2024). Role of AI in blended learning: A systematic literature review. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 25(1), 164–196. https://doi.org/10.19173/IRRODL.V25I1.7566
- Popenici, S. A. D., & Kerr, S. (2017). Exploring the impact of artificial intelligence on teaching and learning in higher education. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 12(1), Article 22. https://doi.org/10.1186/S41039-017-0062-8
- Rincon-Flores, E. G., Castano, L., Guerrero Solis, S. L., Olmos Lopez, O., Rodríguez Hernández, C. F., Castillo Lara, L. A., & Aldape Valdés, L. P. (2024). Improving the learning-teaching process through adaptive learning strategy. Smart Learning Environments, 11(1), Article 27. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-024-00314-9
- Rourke, L., Anderson, T., Garrison, D. R., & Archer, W. (1999). Assessing social presence in asynchronous text-based computer conferencing. International Journal of E-Learning & Distance Education / Revue Internationale Du e-Learning et La Formation à Distance, 14(2), 50–71. https://www.ijede.ca/index.php/jde/article/view/153/341
- Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68–78. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.68
- Saldaña, J. (2021). Coding techniques for quantitative and mixed data. In A. J. Onwuegbuzie & R. B. Johnson (Eds.), The Routledge reviewer’s guide to mixed methods analysis (pp. 151–160). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203729434-14
- Shoufan, A. (2023). Exploring students’ perceptions of ChatGPT: Thematic analysis and follow-up survey. IEEE Access, 11, 38805–38818. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2023.3268224
- Song, C., & Song, Y. (2023). Enhancing academic writing skills and motivation: Assessing the efficacy of ChatGPT in AI-assisted language learning for EFL students. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, Article 1260843. https://doi.org/10.3389/FPSYG.2023.1260843
- Strzelecki, A. (2023). To use or not to use ChatGPT in higher education? A study of students’ acceptance and use of technology. Interactive Learning Environments, 32(9), 5142–5155. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2023.2209881
- Sun, Y., Sheng, D., Zhou, Z., & Wu, Y. (2024). AI hallucination: Towards a comprehensive classification of distorted information in artificial intelligence-generated content. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 11(1), Article 1278. https://doi.org/10.1057/S41599-024-03811-X
- Urban, M., Děchtěrenko, F., Lukavský, J., Hrabalová, V., Svacha, F., Brom, C., & Urban, K. (2024). ChatGPT improves creative problem-solving performance in university students: An experimental study. Computers & Education, 215, Article 105031. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2024.105031
- Wieczorek, M. (2025). Why AI will not democratize education: A critical pragmatist perspective. Philosophy and Technology, 38(2), Article 53. https://doi.org/10.1007/S13347-025-00883-8
- Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods (4th ed.). SAGE.
- Zhan, Y., Boud, D., Dawson, P., & Yan, Z. (2025). Generative artificial intelligence as an enabler of student feedback engagement: A framework. Higher Education Research and Development, 44(5), 1289–1304. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2025.2476513