Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Understanding the Practices, Perceptions, and (Dis)Trust of Generative AI among Instructors: A Mixed-methods Study in the U.S. Higher Education

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2502.05770 v1 pith:2YPMSQBP submitted 2025-02-09 cs.HC cs.CY

Understanding the Practices, Perceptions, and (Dis)Trust of Generative AI among Instructors: A Mixed-methods Study in the U.S. Higher Education

classification cs.HC cs.CY
keywords trustgenaiinstructorsdistrustsurveyededucationhigherfamiliarity
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

Generative AI (GenAI) has brought opportunities and challenges for higher education as it integrates into teaching and learning environments. As instructors navigate this new landscape, understanding their engagement with and attitudes toward GenAI is crucial. We surveyed 178 instructors from a single U.S. university to examine their current practices, perceptions, trust, and distrust of GenAI in higher education in March 2024. While most surveyed instructors reported moderate to high familiarity with GenAI-related concepts, their actual use of GenAI tools for direct instructional tasks remained limited. Our quantitative results show that trust and distrust in GenAI are related yet distinct; high trust does not necessarily imply low distrust, and vice versa. We also found significant differences in surveyed instructors' familiarity with GenAI across different trust and distrust groups. Our qualitative results show nuanced manifestations of trust and distrust among surveyed instructors and various approaches to support calibrated trust in GenAI. We discuss practical implications focused on (dis)trust calibration among instructors.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. "Code Is Cheap. Show Me the Talk.": Lessons from Teaching and Managing AI Coding Tool Usage in a Visualization Course

    cs.HC 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0

    In a CS visualization course, AI coding labs showed refinement as half of student prompts, explanation nearly absent, optional AI preferred by only 56%, and final projects more polished but visually homogeneous.