SRHE Members must log-in to a ccess member registration rates
\n \nOverview
\n \n< span style="font-size:12pt\;">This seminar explores how wor king\, part-time students make sense of the differ ing approaches to Generative AI (“AI”) use between their workplaces and their studies in UK business schools. Whilst AI has captured the zeitgeist\, s tudents’ use of it in HE has been positioned as pl agiarism\, a form of cheating which has labelled i t a taboo topic. This has suppressed student voice \, hampered business schools’ AI usage guideline d evelopment and the sensemaking of students\, educa tors\, and education-related staff. It has also re sulted in a proliferation of research into student s cheating with AI\, further confirming the taboo. Such research offers relatively limited contribut ions to our understanding as it often lacks the de licate and empathetic approach required to researc h taboos.
\n \nIn this seminar\, the speakers wil l share a qualitative study led by the first autho r\, a working\, part-time student researcher\, who conducted interviews with 10 working\, part-time UK business school students who use AI in both pro fessional and academic study settings. Central to the abductive qualitative approach\, an ethics of care was established in the interviews\, with self -disclosure by the first author that nurtured part icipant trust and enabled student voice to be hear d and valued. The interview data provided high inf ormation power (Malterud et al.\,2016) following a bductive qualitative thematic analysis (Braun & Cl arke\, 2022)\, highlighting three themes: 1) inevi tability\, 2) justifiable ethical lines\, and 3) e xercise of agency.
\n \nThis research challenges and contests the application of ‘cheating’ as a co ncept to understand HE students’ usage of AI. It p roposes instead that AI use by students is reposit ioned in a frame of appropriateness with two recom mendations for business schools and more broadly f or HE. First\, HE institutions should facilitate s afe and open environments for dialogue with and be tween students and staff to foster and develop con textually sympathetic guidelines. Second\, HE inst itutions should neither mandate nor prohibit use o f AI in curricula\, thus enabling the critical age ncy of students\, educators\, and education-relate d staff to develop and nurture ongoing dialogue to accommodate changing contexts and positionalities . By querying how HE students who also work make s ense of the differing approaches to Generative AI usage for their studies and for their workplaces\, the nature of this work crosses disciplinary boun daries and offers implications beyond specific sub ject disciplines. It aims to contribute to the flu id understanding of academic practice as mutually constitutive\, bounded by interpretations and acti ons of multiple actors\, including students as cor e and active agents within HE.
\n \n\n \n
Speaker bios
\n \nDr Uracha Chatrakul Na Ayudhya is Reader in Work and Organization at Birkbeck Busin ess School\, Birkbeck\, University of London\, UK. She is an interdisciplinary equality and diversit y scholar with two decades of teaching and researc h experience in organizational psychology\, organi zational behaviour\, and human resource management . Her overall research programme focuses on divers e and unequal working lives and how they intersect with social and structural inequalities. As an ed ucator\, Uracha holds a deep commitment to social justice through her curriculum\, which underpins h er critical pedagogical practice.
DESCRIPTION:SRHE Members must log-in (https://srhe.ac.uk/wp-lo gin.php) to access member registration rates \n \n \n \n Overview\n \n \n \n This seminar explores h ow working\, part-time students make sense of the differing approaches to Generative AI (“AI”) use b etween their workplaces and their studies in UK bu siness schools. Whilst AI has captured the zeitgei st\, students’ use of it in HE has been positioned as plagiarism\, a form of cheating which has labe lled it a taboo topic. This has suppressed student voice\, hampered business schools’ AI usage guide line development and the sensemaking of students\, educators\, and education-related staff. It has a lso resulted in a proliferation of research into s tudents cheating with AI\, further confirming the taboo. Such research offers relatively limited con tributions to our understanding as it often lacks the delicate and empathetic approach required to r esearch taboos. \n \n \n \n In this seminar\, the speakers will share a qualitative study led by the first author\, a working\, part-time student rese archer\, who conducted interviews with 10 working\ , part-time UK business school students who use AI in both professional and academic study settings. Central to the abductive qualitative approach\, a n ethics of care was established in the interviews \, with self-disclosure by the first author that n urtured participant trust and enabled student voic e to be heard and valued. The interview data provi ded high information power (Malterud et al.\,2016) following abductive qualitative thematic analysis (Braun & Clarke\, 2022)\, highlighting three them es: 1) inevitability\, 2) justifiable ethical line s\, and 3) exercise of agency. \n \n \n \n This re search challenges and contests the application of ‘cheating’ as a concept to understand HE students’ usage of AI. It proposes instead that AI use by s tudents is repositioned in a frame of appropriaten ess with two recommendations for business schools and more broadly for HE. First\, HE institutions s hould facilitate safe and open environments for di alogue with and between students and staff to fost er and develop contextually sympathetic guidelines . Second\, HE institutions should neither mandate nor prohibit use of AI in curricula\, thus enablin g the critical agency of students\, educators\, an d education-related staff to develop and nurture o ngoing dialogue to accommodate changing contexts a nd positionalities. By querying how HE students wh o also work make sense of the differing approaches to Generative AI usage for their studies and for their workplaces\, the nature of this work crosses disciplinary boundaries and offers implications b eyond specific subject disciplines. It aims to con tribute to the fluid understanding of academic pra ctice as mutually constitutive\, bounded by interp retations and actions of multiple actors\, includi ng students as core and active agents within HE.\n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n Speaker bios\n \n \n \n Dan iel Lloyd is a part-time independent researcher. H is current research introduces student voice into the discussion around student use of GenAI in busi ness school education – recently presented to a cl osed session of Birkbeck Business School teaching staff. Following what he describes as a "life chan ging" Selection and Assessment module\, as part of his Organisational Psychology MSc\, Daniel develo ped an interest in the problematisation of mainstr eam practices that perpetuate social inequalities. He often takes the opportunity to be the dissente r in the room and speaks up for those not present\ , and those without a voice. Daniel has been worki ng in finance since the mid 1990s\, and a 4 year s tint running his own artisanal picture-framing bus iness until 2020. Having returned to finance he sp ecialises in renewable energy fund management. Dan iel holds a Non-Executive Director certificate fro m the ICAEW\, and completed his MSc in Organisatio nal Psychology at Birkbeck\, University of London in 2025. \n \n \n \n Dr Uracha Chatrakul Na Ayudhy a is Reader in Work and Organization at Birkbeck B usiness School\, Birkbeck\, University of London\, UK. She is an interdisciplinary equality and dive rsity scholar with two decades of teaching and res earch experience in organizational psychology\, or ganizational behaviour\, and human resource manage ment. Her overall research programme focuses on di verse and unequal working lives and how they inter sect with social and structural inequalities. As a n educator\, Uracha holds a deep commitment to soc ial justice through her curriculum\, which underpi ns her critical pedagogical practice.\n \n CATEGORIES:Conference CALSCALE:GREGORIAN DTSTAMP;TZID=Europe/London:20260708T130000 DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20260708T130000 DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20260708T140000 LOCATION:Online event\, link will be provided\n United King dom\n URL:https://srhe.ac.uk/civicrm/event/info/?reset=1&id=803 END:VEVENT END:VCALENDAR