Introduction
Artificial intelligence (AI) is changing the way higher education teaches, assesses students, conducts research and manages its activities. The important question is no longer simply whether universities and colleges should use AI, but how they can use it responsibly and effectively. Generative AI can help students understand difficult concepts, find different explanations and access learning support when they need it. Academics can also use AI to support lesson planning, learning activities and some routine tasks.
However, simply having access to AI does not automatically improve education. The OECD (2023) highlights the importance of combining technology with the right infrastructure, skills, governance and equal access. UNESCO (2023) similarly promotes a human-centred approach in which AI supports people rather than replaces them. For Regent Business School (RBS), AI provides an opportunity to strengthen academic quality and prepare students for a changing world of work. At the same time, RBS must consider South Africa’s unequal access to technology, the different needs of its students and the country’s legal and regulatory requirements. The goal should not be to use as many AI tools as possible. Instead, RBS should create an environment in which students and staff know how to use AI critically, ethically and effectively.
Transforming Teaching, Learning and the Curriculum
AI can support teaching by providing explanations, examples, summaries and opportunities for practice. This can be particularly useful because students enter higher education with different levels of knowledge, language ability and access to learning support. However, not every student has the same access to devices, reliable internet or paid AI tools. If this is not considered, AI could increase existing inequalities. Responsible use therefore means asking important questions: Who can access the technology? Is it easy for everyone to use? Does it work well across different languages and backgrounds? What support is available to students who cannot use the technology? (Woldegiorgis and Chiramba, 2025).
AI should also support educators rather than replace them. Higher education is about more than finding information. It helps students develop critical thinking, creativity, ethical reasoning and professional judgement. These are areas where human interaction and guidance remain essential. RBS should therefore start with the educational need rather than the technology. Before introducing an AI tool, the institution should ask:
• What learning problem will this tool solve?
• Will it improve the student’s learning experience?
• What value does it add?
• What role must the lecturer or other human expert continue to play?
Students should also develop basic AI literacy as part of their education. They need to understand when AI should and should not be used, how to check whether information is correct, how to recognise bias and how to take responsibility for decisions made with AI. UNESCO’s competency frameworks highlight the importance of human values, ethics, knowledge and responsible use of AI (UNESCO, 2024a; 2024b).
RBS can develop these skills by:
• Including practical and ethical AI examples in existing modules;
• Asking students to check and critique AI-generated information;
• Using assignments that demonstrate how students think and make decisions;
• Teaching students how to acknowledge and disclose their use of AI; and
• Helping students understand the risks of relying too heavily on AI.
The goal is to produce graduates who are comfortable working with AI, but who can also think independently, make sound decisions and remain professionally accountable.
Academics, Assessment and Academic Integrity
The growth of AI makes the role of academics even more important. Lecturers need to create meaningful learning experiences, help students judge the quality of information and connect what they learn to real-world situations. This means that academics also need ongoing support and development in areas such as AI, ethical use, assessment design, data protection and the use of AI within their specific disciplines.
Zawacki-Richter et al. (2019) found that educators were often not sufficiently represented in earlier research on AI in higher education. As institutions introduce AI, the knowledge and judgement of academics must therefore remain central. AI has also highlighted a weakness in some traditional forms of assessment. Assessments that mainly ask students to reproduce information are easier for AI to complete. RBS should therefore consider ways of assessing understanding, reasoning, problem-solving and professional judgement.
Students should also receive clear guidance about when they may use AI. Assessment instructions should explain:
• Whether AI is allowed;
• What students may use it for;
• What they need to disclose; and
• That students remain responsible for the accuracy and originality of their work.
AI-detection tools, including Turnitin’s AI indicator, should not automatically be treated as proof that a student has committed misconduct. These tools provide an indication rather than absolute proof. If a concern is raised, it should lead to further investigation. Academic staff should consider the student’s work, the evidence available, the student’s writing or working process and the student’s opportunity to explain their work. The goal should be to create a culture in which students understand that using AI responsibly means checking information, protecting confidential information, acknowledging assistance and taking responsibility for the work they submit.
Institutional Governance, Policy and Data
AI is not only a teaching and learning issue. It can affect research, student services, administration, procurement, data management and institutional decision-making. If different departments adopt AI independently, the institution may end up with different rules, unnecessary costs and risks that are not properly managed. RBS should therefore establish a governance structure that brings together key areas such as academic leadership, teaching and learning, information technology, quality assurance, research, compliance and students.
RBS’s AI policy should clearly explain:
• What types of AI use are acceptable;
• How AI may be used in teaching, assessment and research;
• When AI use must be disclosed;
• Who is responsible for checking AI-generated information;
• How intellectual property should be protected;
• How AI tools should be selected and purchased; and
• What responsibilities staff and students have.
Data protection is particularly important. RBS needs to know what information is being collected, why it is being used, where it is stored, who can access it and how long it is kept. Compliance with the Protection of Personal Information Act 4 of 2013 (POPIA) is essential. The European Union’s AI Act can provide useful guidance when considering different levels of AI risk, but it does not replace South African laws and requirements (European Union, 2024).
Not every AI tool presents the same level of risk. For example, using AI to create examples for a classroom is very different from using AI to assess students, profile them or influence important decisions. The greater the risk, the stronger the controls should be. Higher-risk systems should have appropriate testing, security, transparency, human review and ways for people to challenge or appeal decisions.
The RBS Point of Departure and Strategic Roadmap
RBS should begin by understanding where it currently stands. An AI-readiness assessment could examine how AI is already being used, whether staff and students have the necessary skills, access to technology, infrastructure, policies, procurement practices and data risks. The findings could then be used to create a practical plan showing what needs to be done, who is responsible, what resources are required and how progress will be measured.
Phase Focus Priority actions Period
1. Readiness Build the foundations Assess current AI use; establish governance; develop guidance; build basic AI literacy. 0–12 months
2. Integration Bring AI into teaching and learning Review the curriculum; improve assessment; run supported AI projects and evaluate the results. 12–24 months
3. Innovation Learn and work with others Conduct institutional research; build industry partnerships; share successful practices. 24–36 months
4. Leadership Sustain and strengthen capability Review policies; strengthen quality assurance; engage with the sector; consider an AI hub if appropriate. Long term
Source: adapted from UNESCO (2023; 2024a; 2024b) and OECD (2023).
RBS should not move to the next stage simply because a certain amount of time has passed. Progress should depend on evidence that the institution is ready and that the changes are actually improving teaching, learning and institutional practice. A Centre or Hub for Responsible AI could eventually provide value to RBS. However, this should come after the institution has developed the necessary skills, experience and clear purpose for such a centre.
Conclusion
The answer to AI in higher education is neither to adopt everything as quickly as possible nor to ban it completely. For RBS, responsible AI adoption should start with readiness, good governance and AI literacy. From there, the institution can carefully introduce AI into teaching, learning, assessment and research, while regularly evaluating what works and what does not. Some principles should remain non-negotiable: human judgement, academic integrity, fairness, responsible use of data and equal opportunity to learn.
AI should make people more capable, not make people less important. With thoughtful leadership, clear policies and continuous learning, RBS has an opportunity to develop an approach to AI that is practical, responsible and relevant to the South African higher education environment.
References
European Union (2024). Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence. Official Journal of the European Union, L 2024/1689. Available at: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/1689/oj/eng (Accessed: 7 August 2026).
OECD (2023) OECD Digital Education Outlook 2023: Towards an effective digital education ecosystem. Paris: OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/c74f03de-en
Republic of South Africa (2013). Protection of Personal Information Act 4 of 2013. Pretoria: Government Printer.
UNESCO (2023). Guidance for generative AI in education and research. Paris: UNESCO.
UNESCO (2024a). AI competency framework for teachers. Paris: UNESCO.
UNESCO (2024b). AI competency framework for students. Paris: UNESCO.
Woldegiorgis, E.T. and Chiramba, O. (2025). Access and success in higher education: fostering resilience in historically disadvantaged students in South Africa. Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education, 17(2), pp. 759–771.
Zawacki-Richter, O., Marín, V.I., Bond, M. and Gouverneur, F. (2019). Systematic review of research on artificial intelligence applications in higher education where are the educators?’. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 16, article 39. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-019-0171-0.
