Patterns and Extent of Generative AI Use Among College Students: A Demographic-Based Quantitative Analysis
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.11594/Keywords:
Academic Use, AI Tools, Generative AI, Higher Education, Student EngagementAbstract
This research investigated the trends and levels of generative artificial intelligence (AI) application among the students of the Bachelor of Science in Information Systems (BSIS) at Carmen Municipal College in the Academic Year 2025 to offer a localized approach to a Philippine-based context of higher education. Data was gathered aligned with descriptive quantitative design, 389 respondents (72.6% response rate) were surveyed using a standardized questionnaire and analysed with descriptive statistics and non-parametric tests. It has been found that the most common types of tasks by which students use generative AI are academically related and efficiency-based, namely, completing homework, brainstorming, seeking advice, and brainstorming, with an average usage of 3.15, meaning that AI is a facilitating learning tool, not an alternative to learning on their own. Inferential statistics showed that the difference in perceived AI influence was statistically significant among genders (U = 16,654, p =.047), year level (H (2) =11.40, p =.003), and age (H (4) = 9.95, p =.041), which means that perceived AI influence is different among the demographic groups in the institution. In contrast to the previous research that tends to generalize the application of AI by students in a larger context, the given study notes the patterns of its usage as conditioned by academic level and demographics of learners in a particular institutional environment. The findings can be used as context-specific information that can be used to develop evidence-based policies, AI literacy-focused programs, and responsible integration strategies in other similar public institutions of higher education.
Downloads
References
Abad, J. P., & Garcia, R. M. (2022). Academic integrity challenges in Philippine higher education. Asia Pacific Education Review, 23(4), 623–635. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12564-022-09742-6
Al-Mansour, N. S., Al-Bawardy, M. A., Al-Harbi, A. A., Al-Zahrani, A. A., Al-Ghamdi, A. A., & Al-Harbi, M. A. (2025). Exploring stu-dents' perceptions of GenAI tools in high-er education: A case study. Cogent Educa-tion, 12(1), Article 2560613. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2025.2560613
Bretag, T., Mahmud, S., Wallace, M., Walker, R., McGowan, U., East, J., Green, M., Par-tridge, L., & James, C. (2024). Academic integrity in the age of generative artificial
intelligence: Challenges and policy impli-cations. Higher Education, 88(2), 133–155. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-024-01053-1
Chan, C. K. Y., & Hu, W. (2023). Students’ views on generative AI and academic writing. Computers and Education: Artificial Intel-ligence, 4, 100120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2023.100120
Chen, Y., & Cheung, S. (2025). Effects of gener-ative AI on learning outcomes: A system-atic meta-analysis in higher education. Computers & Education, 176, Article 104238. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2025.104238
Cotton, D. R. E., Cotton, P. A., & Shipway, J. R. (2023). ChatGPT: Student perceptions and implications for assessment. Innova-tions in Education and Teaching Interna-tional, 61(3), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2023.2190148
Dela Cruz, J. P., Santos, A. L., & Villanueva, M. T. (2024). Technology ethics and AI adop-tion in Philippine universities. Philippine Journal of Education, 103(1), 45–60. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.31245.95203
Elliott, M. N., Brown, J. A., Hambarsoomian, K., et al. (2024). Survey protocols, response rates, and representation of underserved patients: A randomized clinical trial. JA-MA Health Forum, 5(1), e234929. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamahealthforum.2023.4929
Farrokhnia, M., Banihashem, S. K., Noroozi, O., & Wals, A. E. J. (2024). A SWOT analysis of ChatGPT in education. Educational Technology Research and Development, 72, 1301–1320. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-023-10203-7
Hair, J. F., Jr., Hult, G. T. M., Risher, J. J., & Mar-ko, S. (2024). Development and valida-tion of generative artificial intelligence attitude scale for students. Frontiers in Computer Science, 7, Article 1528455. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomp.2025.1528455
Kasneci, E., Sessler, K., Küchemann, S., Ban-nert, M., Dementieva, D., Fischer, F., Gas-ser, U., Groh, G., Günnemann, S., Hüller-meier, E., Krusche, S., Kühl, N., Lachner, A., Latzke, M., Schmid, U., Schmidt, A., Seidel, T., Söllner, M., Trautwein, U., … Kasneci, G. (2023). ChatGPT for good? On opportunities and challenges of large language models for education. Learning and Individual Differences, 103, 102274. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2023.102274
Lim, W. M., Gunasekara, A., Pallant, J., Pallant, I., & Pechenkina, E. (2024). Generative AI and higher education: Emerging issues and future directions. International Jour-nal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 21, Article 5. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-024-00422-4
Lund, B. D., Wang, T., Mannuru, N. R., Nie, B., Shimray, S., & Wang, Z. (2023). ChatGPT and the future of higher education: A bib-liometric analysis. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 49(1), 102627. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2022.102627
Newton, P. M., & Doherty, J. (2024). Generative artificial intelligence and assessment in-tegrity. Assessment & Evaluation in High-er Education. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2024.2309881
O’Connor, K., & Chatfield, C. (2024). Student motivations for using AI writing tools in higher education. Computers & Educa-tion, 203, 104839. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2023.104839
Perkins, M. (2023). Academic integrity recon-sidered in the age of generative artificial intelligence. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 48(8), 1273–1286. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2023.2190123
Reyes, L. M., & Mendoza, R. T. (2023). Faculty perspectives on AI-assisted learning and academic integrity in Philippine higher education. Philippine Journal of Educa-tion, 102(2), 35–49. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.18463.87207
Rudolph, J., Tan, S., & Tan, S. (2023). ChatGPT: Bullshit or the end of traditional assess-ment in higher education? Journal of Ap-plied Learning & Teaching, 6(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.37074/jalt.2023.6.1.9
Süße, T., & Kobert, M. (2023, November). Gen-erative AI at school: Insights from a study about German students' self-reported us-age, the role of students' action-guiding characteristics, perceived learning suc-cess and the consideration of contextual factors (Version 1 – English). Bielefeld University of Applied Sciences and Arts. https://www.hsbi.de/publikationsserver/download/3768/3769/Studie_Generative_KI_an_Schulen_EN.pdf
Sun, H., & Zhou, Y. (2024). Age, digital nativity, and generative artificial intelligence adoption among university students. In-formation, 15(1), 45. https://doi.org/10.3390/info15010045
Tlili, A., Shehata, B., Adarkwah, M. A., Bozkurt, A., Hickey, D. T., Huang, R., & Agyemang, B. (2023). What if the devil is my guardi-an angel: ChatGPT as a case study of ethi-cal concerns in educational AI. Smart Learning Environments, 10, 27. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-023-00234-4
UNESCO. (2023). Guidance for generative AI in education and research. UNESCO Publish-ing. https://doi.org/10.54675/AIED.2023
Wu, M.-J., Zhao, K., & Fils-Aime, F. (2022). Re-sponse rates of online surveys in pub-lished research: A meta-analysis. Com-puters in Human Behavior Reports, 7, 100206. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chbr.2022.100206
Zawacki-Richter, O., Bond, M., Marin, V. I., & Gouverneur, F. (2024). Systematic review of artificial intelligence adoption in high-er education. Educational Technology Re-search and Development. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-024-10314-1
Zhai, X. (2022). ChatGPT user experience: Im-plications for education. Smart Learning Environments, 9, 21. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-022-00200-3
Zhu, C., Yu, S., Riezebos, P., & van der Veen, I. (2024). Generative AI literacy in Asian universities. Educational Technology & Society, 27(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.30191/ETS.202401_27(1).0001
Downloads
Published
Data Availability Statement
The data supporting the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.
Issue
Section
Categories
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Neil S. Pelino, Junry P. Bacalso, Jellow S. Painagan, Jennie Rose J. Dapar
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See the Effect of Open Access).
