Challenges and Risks of Artificial Intelligence for the Higher Education System: Faculty Understanding and Practical Readiness for Change

One of the main contradictions in the integration of artificial intelligence (AI) technologies into higher education is that, while providing unprecedented didactic opportunities for adapting and personalizing learning, AI simultaneously creates a complex set of systemic challenges and risks that require a rethinking of educational content, traditional teaching and assessment methods, and the role of the teacher in the educational process. Moreover, the effectiveness of countering emerging threats largely depends on the extent to which faculty understand these challenges and are prepared to respond to them. The purpose of this study is to identify key challenges and risks facing the higher education system in the context of AI, as well as to determine the extent to which faculty understand these challenges and risks and their readiness to take practical steps to overcome them. Based on an analysis of the scientific literature, three key challenges were identified (changes in educational content, changes in traditional approaches and methods of teaching and assessment, and the changing role of the teacher in the “teacher-AI-student” triad) and four risk groups (the development of clip-based thinking and a decrease in students’ cognitive activity, the spread of AI plagiarism, hallucinations and bias in AI, and the strengthening of digital and social inequality). An online survey was conducted to determine lecturers’ understanding of these challenges and risks, as well as their preparedness to respond to them. Respondents included 1,272 lecturers from 43 Russian universities. The survey results reveal a systemic gap between the stated understanding of challenges and risks (about 70% of teachers recognize the threat of AI plagiarism and the decline in students’ cognitive abilities) and the actual practical readiness for organizational and methodological changes (only 20-30% of teachers are actually changing their teaching and monitoring methods, integrating AI into the educational process). Approximately 30-40% of respondents expressed a neutral attitude toward most issues related to the implementation of new methods and forms of assessment, while 15-25% expressed a negative attitude. The data obtained indicate that, at the current stage, the systemic integration of AI into higher education cannot be carried out on a proactive basis by individual faculty. The majority of Russian university faculty lack systemic support (regulatory, methodological, time-based, and financial) for the transition to new educational models in the context of the spread of AI. Addressing the challenges and risks of AI is possible only at the institutional level through the development and implementation of regulatory guidelines for the use of AI, the introduction of universal AI competencies in the Federal State Educational Standards of Higher Education, the revision of faculty workloads, and the creation of a resource base for personalized student engagement with AI tools.