Not for Novices

Purpose This conceptual paper examines what underlies decision-making in generative change processes to explore how generative artificial intelligence (GAI) might shape the future of organisational change. Design/methodology/approach This investigation draws on Snowden and Stanbridge's (2004) social complexity concept, Archer's (1995) morphogenetic/morphostatic explanatory methodology and Mackenzie and Bititci's (2023) social systems-based model for organisational change to explain how structure, culture and agency influence generative change processes in complex adaptive social systems. Findings Both human-based decision-making and machine-based decision-making have roles to play in generative change. This paper proposes that human reflexivity mediates ideas, whereas the material aspects of artificial intelligence (AI) and GAI mediate tasks. The former shapes the change interventions that take place and the latter contributes to their more effective execution. Practical implications In generative change processes, AI and GAI technologies should be focused on tasks that support human-based decision-making. Originality/value This paper explores decision-making in organisational change from a social complexity perspective and identifies the complementary roles of human reflexivity and AI and GAI materiality in delivering emergent outcomes.

Technologically advanced artificial intelligence (AI) is making a significant contribution to strengthening national security. AI algorithms facilitate the processing of vast amounts of information, increasing the speed and accuracy of decision-making. Artificial intelligence and machine learning (AI/ML) are crucial for state and integrated hybrid attacks and protecting new threats in cyberspace. Existing AI capabilities have significant potential to impact national security by leveraging existing machine learning technology for automation in labor-intensive activities such as satellite imagery analysis and defense against cyber attacks. This article examines selected aspects of the impact of artificial intelligence on enhancing a state’s ability to protect its interests and its citizens., artificial intelligence through the use of neutron networks, predictive analytics and machine learning algorithms enables security agencies to analyse vast amounts of data and identify patterns indicative of potential threats. Integrating artificial intelligence into surveillance, border control and threat assessment systems enhances the ability to respond preemptively to security challenges. In addition, artificial intelligence algorithms facilitate the processing of vast amounts of information, increasing the speed and accuracy of decision-making by police authorities. The rapid development of AI raises a number of questions for its use in securing not only national security but protecting all citizens. In particular, it is worth answering the question How does artificial intelligence affect national security and clarifying the issue of how law enforcement agencies can use artificial intelligence to maximise the benefits of the new technology in terms of security and protecting communities from rising crime. The analysis is based on a descriptive method in describing the phenomenon; by explaining the concepts and applications of artificial intelligence to determine its role in the national security sphere. An analysis of the usefulness of artificial intelligence in particular in police operations is undertaken, with the aim of defending the thesis that, despite some threats to the protection of human rights from AI, it is becoming the best tool in the fight against all types of crime in the country. Technological advances in AI can also have many positive effects for law enforcement, and useful for law enforcement agencies, for example in facilitating the identification of persons or vehicles, predicting trends in criminal activities, tracking illegal criminal activities or illegal money flows, flagging and responding to fake news. Artificial intelligence (AI) has emerged as one of the biggest threats to information security, but efforts are being made to mitigate this new threat, but also to find solutions on how AI can become an ally in the fight against cyber-security, crime and terrorist threats. Artificial intelligence algorithms search huge datasets of communication traffic, satellite images and social media posts to identify potential cyber security threats, terrorist activities and organized crime. It is advisable, when analyzing the opportunities and threats that AI poses to national and public security, to gain a strategic advantage in the context of rapid technological change and also to manage the many risks associated with AI. The conclusion highlights the impact of AI on national security, creating a range of new opportunities coupled with challenges that government agencies should be prepared for in addressing ethical and security dilemmas. Furthermore, AI improves predictive analytics, thereby enabling security agencies to more accurately anticipate potential threats and enhance their preparedness by identifying vulnerabilities in the national security infrastructure

Generative artificial intelligence in dentistry: A narrative review of current approaches and future challenges

Generative artificial intelligence (AI) has taken the world by storm, with notable tension transpiring in the field of education. Given that Generative AI is rapidly emerging as a transformative innovation, this article endeavors to offer a seminal rejoinder that aims to (i) reconcile the great debate on Generative AI in order to (ii) lay the foundation for Generative AI to co-exist as a transformative resource in the future of education. Using critical analysis as a method and paradox theory as a theoretical lens (i.e., the “how”), this article (i) defines Generative AI and transformative education (i.e., the “ideas”), (ii) establishes the paradoxes of Generative AI (i.e., the “what”), and (iii) provides implications for the future of education from the perspective of management educators (i.e., the “so what”). Noteworthily, the paradoxes of Generative AI are four-fold: (Paradox #1) Generative AI is a ‘friend’ yet a ‘foe’, (Paradox #2) Generative AI is ‘capable’ yet ‘dependent’, (Paradox #3) Generative AI is ‘accessible’ yet ‘restrictive’, and (Paradox #4) Generative AI gets even ‘popular’ when ‘banned’ (i.e., the “what”). Through a position that seeks to embrace rather than reject Generative AI, the lessons and implications that emerge from the discussion herein represent a seminal contribution from management educators on this trending topic and should be useful for approaching Generative AI as a game-changer for education reformation in management and the field of education at large, and by extension, mitigating a situation where Generative AI develops into a Ragnarök that dooms the future of education of which management education is a part of (i.e., the “so what”).

Teacher education students play double role as present learners and future educators. Hence, they need targeted training to navigate the growing influence of Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) on teaching, learning and professional identity. However, existing artificial intelligence (AI) literacy programmes predominantly emphasize technical AI knowledge and pre‐GenAI tools or are offered by GenAI platforms that focus on their own technologies' features, thereby lacking pedagogically structured frameworks that address non‐technical dimensions such as ethics, contextual understanding and the development of human‐centered, critical and lifelong learning mindsets to adapt to rapid technology changes. Furthermore, limitation of time in teacher education syllabus and faculty's lack of AI literacy require targeted intervention. This design‐based research (DBR) aims to fill this gap by developing and evaluating a set of design principles for GenAI literacy training in teacher education. Integrating contemporary AI competency frameworks for learners and teachers, the study implements these principles in a workshop that serves as the research prototype. The prototype was first piloted with 14 master's students and then evaluated with 29 teacher education (TE) students. Results show significant gains in participants' AI competence self‐efficacy, attitudes towards GenAI and commitment to critical, ethical and pedagogical engagement with GenAI tools. The findings highlight the need for teacher education programmes to integrate GenAI literacy that supports teachers' evolving roles as reflective practitioners, co‐creators and lifelong learners in an AI‐driven world. Practitioner notes What is already known about this topic Students' self‐efficacy and mindset influence their adoption of GenAI in learning and teaching. GenAI competency is essential for teacher education students, encompassing technological, ethical and sociocultural dimensions. Implementing AI literacy training faces challenges such as educators' limited AI literacy, the lack of pedagogical frameworks and the need to integrate technical knowledge with ethical reasoning, self‐regulated learning and metacognitive skills. Transformative learning is crucial in preparing teacher education students as co‐creators and facilitators in AI‐enhanced education. What this paper adds This study presents the design and evaluation of an AI competency training programme to enhance teacher education students' self‐efficacy, critical and human‐centered AI mindsets and human–AI interaction skills. Using design‐based research, it identifies key principles for AI literacy training, demonstrating how transformative, active and experiential learning approaches can prepare teacher education students for evolving roles in AI‐enhanced education. Implications for practice and/or policy Educational technologists can apply the proposed design principles to develop GenAI tools and AI systems that enhance AI competency and self‐regulated learning (SRL). Educators can integrate these AI training principles into their teaching strategies and enhance their task assignments and assessments to foster deep learning, self‐regulated learning and metacognitive skills in the age of GenAI. Policymakers should update teacher education curriculum to include AI competency, strengthen content and pedagogical knowledge, especially in social emotional learning, formative and authentic assessment methods and establish guidelines for selecting GenAI tools that support human intelligence and mitigate over‐reliance.

Generative AI tools and empowerment in L2 academic writing

Purpose Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) is rapidly transforming business strategy, innovation processes and governance practices. While prior research has focused primarily on technological implementation and performance outcomes, limited attention has been paid to how senior executives interpret, frame and adapt to GenAI as a strategic and ethical phenomenon. This study aims to explore executives’ sensemaking and adaptive responses to GenAI and to develop a conceptual model that captures this process. Design/methodology/approach The study adopts a qualitative exploratory design based on semi-structured interviews with 15 senior executives from diverse industries in Greece. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis to identify recurring patterns in executives’ perceptions, decision rationales and ethical considerations related to GenAI adoption and integration. Findings The analysis reveals four interrelated dimensions shaping executive adaptation: strategic integration and decision-making, business value and innovation, human–AI collaboration and workforce transformation and ethics, governance and adoption barriers. Cross-thematic synthesis indicates that executives perceive GenAI as a decision-support and innovation amplifier rather than an autonomous decision-maker. These findings inform an Emergent Integrative Model of Executive Adaptation to GenAI, conceptualized as a dynamic cycle comprising strategic sensemaking (Curate), operational experimentation (Create) and ethical consolidation (Consolidate). Research limitations/implications Several executives cited technical and resource limitations as obstacles to effective GenAI implementation. Challenges include legacy systems, lack of skilled artificial intelligence (AI) engineers and limited integration between AI platforms and enterprise software. Practical implications This model advances understanding of executive cognition and adaptive intelligence in the AI era, positioning leadership as a process of continuous learning, sensemaking and ethical stewardship. Practically, the research offers a roadmap for organizations and policymakers for aligning GenAI-driven innovation with responsible governance and leadership development. Social implications By highlighting the role of executive stewardship, the study underscores how ethical leadership in GenAI adoption influences public trust, workforce well-being and organizational legitimacy. Originality/value Existing research on AI in business has predominantly focused on technological implementation, efficiency gains and economic outcomes. Studies emphasize measurable benefits such as productivity enhancement, improved decision-making speed and customer experience optimization. However, fewer studies explore how executive cognition and strategic reasoning shape the trajectory of AI adoption – particularly regarding GenAI technologies that introduce new forms of creative automation. The study advances leadership and sensemaking research by shifting the focus from GenAI adoption outcomes to executive cognition and ethical stewardship. It offers a novel integrative model that explains how strategy, innovation and governance co-evolve in the GenAI era.

Background: Qualitative data is a rich source of information about the student experience. However, the amount of work necessary for effective analyses can make it less accessible for directing broad educational decisions. A wide array of software has been developed to provide quick summaries of qualitative data, but has yet to provide the in-depth analysis afforded by trained coders and educational experts employing established methodology such as thematic analyses. Recent research has suggested that current Generative Artificial intelligence (GenAI) offers a potential of quick and effective qualitative analyses comparable to human researcher. Aims: The present study partially replicated recent step-wise thematic analysis procedures (Naeem et al., 2023; Nyaaba et al., 2025), employing two separate GenAI (Chat GPT 4.5, Gemini 2.5). This partial replication aimed to test GenAI's ability to analyse students' short answer feedback regarding the use of a recently developed educational platform. Methods: 580 students (grades three to six) from one primary school in Japan participated in this study. The present study followed procedures developed (Naeem et al., 2023) and validated by recent research comparing GenAI and human coders (Nyaaba et al., 2025). Consistent with this research, students' open-ended responses to a request for feedback regarding learning experiences with a bespoke digital learning-to-read were analysed employing two GenAI. Results: Comparison of coding from each GenAI suggested robust overlap, but the potential for strong analysis through the integration of codes (15 in total). A random subset (20 feedbacks) was coded by each GenAI, coder inter-rated reliability was tested and suggested sufficient reliability (Cohen’s Kappa > .61). Review of the final coding by ChatGPT4.5, suggested coherency and consistency. Results from ChatGPT4.5 for each of the remaining thematic analysis steps (themes, conceptualisation, conceptual model) were reviewed by the researchers. The final conceptual models describing the student experiences were used to construct directions for further refinement of the digital learning-to-read platform. The partial replication of Nyaaba et al.'s GenAI thematic analysis suggested that with careful supervision, GenAI are a powerful tool for efficient and substantive thematic analysis. Given the enormous amount of feedback collected through a range of different forums within education, using GenAI to make sense of this information an invaluable is opportunity for many educators and researchers.

Generative artificial intelligence (AI) has captured into the mainstream, demonstrating capabilities that once belonged solely to the realm of human cognition. From defeating world champions in complex games to generating human-quality text and images, Generative AI has proven its potential to revolutionize countless industries. The electric power grid is no exception. Generative AI's ability to process vast amounts of data rapidly, assist decision support and identify patterns could significantly enhance power grid operations. For example, Generative AI could improve state estimation where measurements are not available or integrate renewable energy sources more efficiently with probabilistic forecasting. The key contributions of this whitepaper are outlined below: (1) Comprehensive overview of Generative AI's applications in power grid operations: It highlights the opportunities in areas such as forecasting, state estimation, and demonstrating the potential for enhancing efficiency, reliability, and resilience. (2) Expanding Generative AI's impact through synergies with emerging technologies: The paper introduce NREL developed eGridGPT and explores how AI orchestration, multi-agent systems, and Digital Twins can collaborate to optimize grid operations, addressing the complexities of a decarbonized and electrified future. (3) In-depth analysis of challenges in implementing Generative AI: This includes considerations like data availability and quality, model validation, certification, and ethical concerns, ensuring responsible AI deployment. (4) Emphasizing human-AI collaboration: The whitepaper underscores the importance of trustworthy, transparency, and explainability in AI systems to promote seamless interaction between human operators and AI, ultimately improving decision-making. (5) Exploring future research and development: It identifies critical areas for further advancement to fully realize Generative AI's potential in power grid operations. This whitepaper serves as a valuable resource for researchers, practitioners, and policymakers looking to harness Generative AI for a more reliable, stable, and cost-effective power grid.

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is a rapidly evolving field that is influencing every aspect of life. Generative AI (GenAI) as a sub-branch of AI is used to create content in various formats such as text, images, video, and audio. This paper discusses the implications of GenAI for Open Educational Practices (OEP), highlighting the potential affordances and challenges. GenAI can address the challenges within the OEP by leveraging openness and ethical use. GenAI’s “generative” nature and human-like language capability can provide resources such as course material, activities, examples, questions, assessment, and learning outcomes in the context of OEP. With machine learning and deep learning infrastructure, it can support the discoverability and accessibility of open resources by increasing the metadata quality. GenAI can automatically score student assignments, answer their questions, and provide instant feedback to address the lack of interaction and feedback that arises due to the large number of students, especially in massive open online courses (MOOC). On the other hand, GenAI brings challenges such as data privacy and security, copyright, biased outputs, and the generation of false information. The conclusions emphasize the importance of a nuanced approach that considers not only the advantages but also the risks associated with adopting GenAI in the OEP world. Researching and developing how to apply these technologies to education is important to shape the future of education.

This study investigates the adoption and impact of Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) tools on English as a Foreign Language (EFL) learners, focusing on self-efficacy, motivation, and predicted exam performance. Using a mixed-methods approach, the research combines survey data (N = 595) and interviews (N = 8) from Chinese university students preparing for the College English Test 4. Quantitative analysis shows that positive attitudes, perceived usefulness, and ease of use predict GenAI usage frequency, while intrinsic motivation negatively correlates with use. GenAI use frequency did not significantly affect predicted test scores or self-efficacy levels. Younger students used GenAI more frequently. Qualitative data reveals that students primarily use GenAI as supplementary learning resources, which, while beneficial, do not substantially enhance self-efficacy or predicted exam performance. The study founds a knowledge gap in the effectiveness of these tools in EFL contexts. It suggests strategies for optimizing GenAI in EFL learning, including blending with traditional methods, providing user training, balancing technology with traditional approaches, ensuring equal access, and customizing GenAI for education. The findings imply a need for educators to supervise GenAI use and for institutions to facilitate effective integration. Future research should examine long-term and cultural effects of GenAI use in education.

Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) is changing the landscape of higher education and profoundly affecting college students' learning performance and learning psychology. This study explored the types of behaviors that college students use GenAI and the mechanisms that influence academic burnout. The data were from 369 full-time undergraduate students through a questionnaire, and the hypotheses were analyzed using SPSS 27.0 and the Amos 28.0 plug-in. Results showed that undergraduates demonstrated high levels of GenAI use and acceptance in their academic endeavors, with GenAI assisted homework receiving the highest scores. Significant differences in the performance of GenAI users were observed on gender, academic achievement, and major category. SEM revealed that plagiarized GenAI use and GenAI-assisted classes directly increased academic burnout. In contrast, the effects of GenAI alternative search tasks, GenAI assisted homework, and GenAI evaluation feedback on academic burnout were indirect, mediated through plagiarized GenAI use and GenAI assisted classroom responses. Specifically, there are complex mechanisms of influence between GenAI use behaviors and college student burnout. This study brings new perspectives to the existing literature and articulates valuable insights around the use of GenAI in higher education practice.

The introduction of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) has been met with a mix of reactions by higher education institutions, ranging from consternation and resistance to whole-hearted acceptance. Previous work has looked at the discourse and policies adopted by universities across the U.S. as well as educators, along with the inclusion of GenAI-related content and topics in higher education. Building on previous research, this study reports findings from a survey of engineering educators on their use of and perspectives toward generative AI. Specifically, we surveyed 98 educators from engineering, computer science, and education who participated in a workshop on GenAI in Engineering Education to learn about their perspectives on using these tools for teaching and research. We asked them about their use of and comfort with GenAI, their overall perspectives on GenAI, the challenges and potential harms of using it for teaching, learning, and research, and examined whether their approach to using and integrating GenAI in their classroom influenced their experiences with GenAI and perceptions of it. Consistent with other research in GenAI education, we found that while the majority of participants were somewhat familiar with GenAI, reported use varied considerably. We found that educators harbored mostly hopeful and positive views about the potential of GenAI. We also found that those who engaged more with their students on the topic of GenAI, both as communi-cators (those who spoke directly with their students) and as incorporators (those who included it in their syllabus), tend to be more positive about its contribution to learning, while also being more attuned to its potential abuses. These findings suggest that integrating and engaging with generative AI is essential to foster productive interactions between instructors and students around this technology. Our work ultimately contributes to the evolving discourse on GenAI use, integration, and avoidance within educational settings. Through exploratory quantitative research, we have identified specific areas for further investigation.

Objective The current literature on Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) in tertiary settings primarily focuses on the risk it poses to academic integrity, and ways to reduce or remove GenAI use in assessments. As psychology graduates enter a workforce where GenAI is present, educators need to prepare students to use GenAI responsibly. This scoping review aims to assess the current state of knowledge in tertiary psychology regarding opportunities for integrating GenAI into assessment methods. Method A comprehensive literature search identified four studies for inclusion. These were published in Australia, Canada, Switzerland, and the United States, and included two quantitative case studies, a mixed-method case study, and a pedagogical case study. Results Three themes were generated: 1) GenAI can be used as an effective psychology tutor, 2) GenAI can be used for authentic assessment in undergraduate psychology, and 3) Critiquing GenAI as a form of assessment can enhance student learning and AI literacy. Conclusions Only four studies were identified, but all indicate that GenAI can be meaningfully incorporated into psychology assessments. However, this is an underdeveloped area and ongoing research with a particular focus on developing evidence-based assessment methods which adapt to the evolving GenAI landscape is needed.

ABSTRACTBackgroundWith the rapid advancement of technology, the integration of Generative Artificial Intelligence (GAI) in education has gained considerable attention. Many studies have examined GAI's impact on learning outcomes, yet their conclusions are inconsistent, highlighting the need for a comprehensive review to clarify its overall effects and identify influential factors.ObjectivesThis study aims to conduct a meta‐analysis of the effects of GAI on student learning outcomes across cognitive, competency and affective dimensions. Additionally, it seeks to explore how various moderating factors, including subject discipline, instructional duration, knowledge type, prior knowledge and tool type, influence GAI's effectiveness.MethodsA meta‐analysis was performed on 34 experimental and quasi‐experimental studies published internationally. Effect sizes were calculated for overall learning outcomes and categorised by dimension. Further analysis was conducted to assess the influence of moderating variables on the impact of GAI.ResultsThe meta‐analysis indicates that Generative Artificial Intelligence has a significant positive impact on overall learning outcomes, with a combined effect size of 0.68 (p < 0.001). The impact is particularly pronounced in the cognitive dimension (g = 0.795) and the competency dimension (g = 0.711), while its effect on the affective dimension (g = 0.507) is moderate but still significant. The analysis of moderating variables reveals that the effectiveness of GAI is influenced by discipline type but is not significantly affected by instructional period, knowledge type, prior knowledge level, or tool type. Specifically, GAI exhibits the highest positive effects in mathematics, science and humanities, whereas its impact is relatively lower yet still significant in computer science and medical/nursing education. Additionally, GAI's effectiveness does not significantly differ across various instructional periods, different knowledge types, learners with varying prior knowledge levels, or different AI tool versions.ConclusionsTo optimise GAI's use in education, the study suggests aligning GAI with specific subject needs, adapting tools for different student levels, integrating GAI with traditional teaching and establishing monitoring mechanisms. These strategies aim to maximise GAI's positive impact on learning efficiency and quality across educational settings.