ETHICAL ASPECTS OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE USAGE IN HIGHER EDUCATION

The integration of artificial intelligence into higher education represents a fundamental transformation requiring careful ethical navigation.This research has identified core ethical tensions including conflicts between academic integrity and pedagogical innovation, student autonomy and institutional oversight, efficiency and privacy, and equity and access.These tensions resist simple resolution and instead require ongoing negotiation balancing competing values and interests.Analysis of current institutional approaches reveals that effective AI ethics frameworks move beyond binary prohibition or permission toward contextually differentiated policies grounded in educational principles.The most promising approaches combine clear institutional values with flexibility for disciplinary and pedagogical variation, comprehensive AI literacy education with faculty development support, authentic assessment redesign with transparent governance processes, and equity commitments with evidence-based practice.Institutions that have made progress on AI ethics share common characteristics including leadership commitment, adequate resource allocation, inclusive policy development, and recognition that addressing AI requires sustained effort rather than one-time solutions.Tsai and Gasevic's (2017) study of student perspectives on learning analytics revealed significant discomfort with pervasive data collection practices, particularly when students lack clear information about what data is collected, how it is analysed, and who has access.Students expressed particular concern about predictive analytics that might limit educational opportunities based on algorithmic assessments of their potential, preferring systems that provide insights and recommendations while preserving student autonomy in decision-making.Zeide's (2017) legal analysis of student privacy in the AI era examined how existing regulatory frameworks like FERPA (Family Educational Rights and Privacy ResearchEthics, 2(1), 101.