Improving MOOCs with Instructional Design: From Motivation to Effective Learning

Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) have opened the door to education for millions of learners around the world. Originally developed to provide free and flexible learning for those without access to traditional classrooms, MOOCs have become a widely used resource, offering courses on nearly any subject or certification. While the idea of making education more accessible is exciting, MOOCs still face real challenges. Completion rates are low, engagement is inconsistent, and learners often drop off before reaching their goals. 

These challenges highlight the importance of instructional design in shaping more effective and supportive online learning environments. Looking at both the strengths of MOOCs and the difficulties learners encounter, points to clear opportunities for applying appropriate design strategies informed by motivation theory. When course structures are intentionally aligned with learners’ needs and goals, MOOCs can move beyond simple accessibility and serve as more reliable pathways to meaningful and lasting learning outcomes. 

The Benefits of MOOCs 

MOOCs provide flexible and affordable learning opportunities, opening doors to self-development and competency-building beyond formal educational settings (Müller et al., 2024). By removing barriers like cost, location, and entry requirements, they open valuable opportunities for a broader range of learners. 

As mentioned, one of the primary advantages of MOOCs is their affordability. Most MOOCs are either free or available at a relatively low cost, allowing learners to engage with high-quality content without the financial strain of tuition-based programs. Many MOOC platforms are open-source and designed to scale, which means they can support thousands of learners at the same time without limiting who can participate (West et al., 2018). 

MOOCs also provide a unique blend of flexibility and structure through synchronous and asynchronous learning formats (West et al., 2018).  Asynchronous courses allow learners to engage with content on their own time, which makes it easier to fit learning around work, family, or other responsibilities. Synchronous courses, on the other hand, include live sessions that bring people together in real time and help build a sense of community. This combination supports a variety of learning styles and makes it easier to design experiences that meet learners where they are. 

Another key benefit of MOOCs is their potential to cultivate a sense of belonging and connection within a digital learning community (West et al., 2018). While the large-scale nature of MOOCs might seem impersonal, a handful of platforms include forums, peer feedback, and group activities that encourage collaboration and social interaction. 

Despite these advantages, MOOCs face a persistent challenge of having notoriously low completion rates. Research shows that fewer than 15% of enrolled learners typically finish their courses (Loizzo, 2015). This issue raises important questions about learner engagement and the overall effectiveness of MOOCs, setting the stage for exploring how instructional design can make a meaningful difference. 

The Role of Instructional Design in Improving MOOCs 

Low completion rates in MOOCs are often linked to factors like course length, learner motivation, and engagement strategies (Jordan, 2015). However, these numbers don’t tell the whole story. Many learners enroll with different goals in mind. Some join to refresh prior knowledge or explore new topics without aiming for a certificate, which can lead to less consistent participation or course completion (Zhu et al., 2022). Still, improving course design to better support diverse learners and sustain motivation is essential to helping more participants reach their goals. Thoughtful instructional design offers strategies that enhance engagement, build community, and ultimately support higher completion rates in MOOCs. 

Motivation and The Self-Determination Theory 

Understanding what motivates learners is a key part of designing effective MOOCs. While most learners enter a course with the intention of completing it, motivation can waver due to factors like loss of interest, lack of prior knowledge, or difficulty managing time and staying self-directed (Zhu et al., 2022). 

Motivation is often categorized as either intrinsic or extrinsic. Intrinsic motivation stems from personal interest or curiosity, learners who simply want to expand their knowledge or dive into a subject they enjoy (Zhu et al., 2022). Extrinsic motivation, on the other hand, is more outcome-driven and tied to goals like earning a credential, gaining a job skill, or fulfilling a professional requirement.  

Both types of motivation tie into Self-Determination Theory (SDT), which emphasizes three basic psychological needs: autonomy, competence, and relatedness (Jain & Roy, 2024). When these needs are met, learners tend to feel more motivated and engaged performing tasks that they may not have a strong desire or interest in. However, the learner understands that the task may be necessary for more desirable outcomes.  

To break SDT down a bit more, intrinsic motivation tends to grow when a course helps learners feel in control, capable, and connected—even in a virtual space (West et al., 2018). And while intrinsic motivation can be a strong driver, many MOOCs still rely on extrinsic motivators, especially when learners enroll with goals like career advancement or earning academic credit. 

That said, not all extrinsic motivation is the same. Integrated regulation is a form of extrinsic motivation that has proven to be the most effective. Integrated regulation is where a learner understands the importance of a course and connects it to their identity or long-term goals (West et al., 2018). Therefore, even if the course itself isn’t particularly enjoyable and if the learner sees it as important for their future, the student is much more likely to follow through and complete it. 

From a design perspective, supporting both intrinsic and extrinsic motivation is essential. This starts with clearly communicating course objectives and pacing at the very beginning. When learners know what to expect and how to plan their time, they’re more likely to stay committed. Research suggests that providing a roadmap, offering time-management tips, and helping learners anticipate the course pace can boost follow-through and reduce drop-off (Zhu et al., 2022). 

For instance, organizing objectives into smaller, manageable chunks and incorporating regular check-ins or assessments can help build momentum (Rogers-Estable et al., 2015). These design choices support competence and provide a sense of progress, which can be motivating on its own. 

Active Learning and Human Connection 

While designing for motivation lays the foundation for learner engagement, maintaining that engagement throughout the course requires more than just clear goals and pacing. Learners also need to feel connected to the content and the learning community. This is where active learning strategies and human connection play a crucial role. By making the learning experience more interactive and socially supportive, MOOCs can not only reinforce motivation but also deepen understanding and increase retention. 

Active learning emphasizes the importance of engaging with content in meaningful ways rather than passively consuming information. Research shows that simply watching videos or reading text rarely leads to deep learning or long-term skill development (Müller et al., 2024). Instead, retention improves when learners are asked to apply what they’re learning through activities such as problem-solving, discussions, and collaborative projects. These kinds of activities push students to reflect on the material and connect it to real-world situations, which helps build a deeper sense of competence. For more background on this topic, you can refer to my earlier article on active learning and learning theory. 

Social interaction is another important aspect of active learning. Drawing on Vygotsky’s theory of the Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD), learners tend to make the most progress when supported by others—especially peers or instructors who can guide them just beyond their current level of understanding (West et al., 2018). Learning in a community allows learners to exchange ideas, receive feedback, and challenge their thinking, which can help deepen comprehension and improve motivation. 

However, the asynchronous nature of many MOOCs can create a sense of isolation. Transactional Distance Theory explains that when learners feel psychologically distant from their instructor or peers, they may become disengaged or discouraged (West et al., 2018). To reduce this distance, course designers can implement strategies that promote regular communication and interaction. For example, scheduled live sessions, walkthrough videos, and personalized messages can simulate a more human presence in the course. 

Discussion forums also serve as a valuable space for connection and reflection. When used intentionally, they can create accountability, spark thoughtful conversations, and cultivate a sense of community. Instructors or facilitators can encourage participation by posing open-ended questions, acknowledging responses, and sharing model answers after learners have submitted their own. Even automated instructor feedback on assessments can make a course feel more responsive and supportive for the learner. 

Human connection can also be encouraged by offering networking opportunities, such as prompting learners to form Personal Learning Networks (PLNs) or encouraging them to connect on external platforms. When learners feel they’re part of a broader learning community—whether through peer support, instructor presence, or collaborative tasks—they’re more likely to stay engaged and persist through challenges, further supporting and encouraging their self-determination. 

User Experience Design 

Even with strong content and engaging activities, poor design can quickly derail a learner’s progress. When a course interface is confusing or unintuitive, learners must spend time figuring out how to navigate rather than focusing on the material. These friction points often stem from design flaws that create unnecessary barriers to learning (West et al., 2018). 

Applying principles of User Experience (UX) and Human-Computer Interaction (HCI) helps prevent these issues. A user-centered design (UCD) approach ensures that learners’ needs, behaviors, and expectations are prioritized throughout the design process (West et al., 2018). This can be implemented and considered when designing with an Instructional Design Model, which will be explored further in this article. Clean layouts, consistent navigation, and accessible features reduce cognitive load and help learners stay focused. 

For example, consistent navigation menus, readable fonts, and clearly labeled buttons contribute to a smoother learning experience. Intuitive layouts and minimal distractions help learners stay on task. Even small decisions, such as how feedback is displayed, how long pages take to load, or whether course modules are visually grouped in logical sequences, can either enhance or interrupt the flow of learning. 

Gamification and the Role of Play in Learning 

As MOOCs continue to evolve, gamification seems like an effective strategy to keep learners motivated and engaged. Gamification is defined as the application of game design elements in non-game contexts (West et al., 2018). In educational settings, gamification has been shown to boost motivation, increase engagement, and support content retention (West et al., 2018). 

Incorporating elements like digital badges, progress tracking, and certification milestones can help learners visualize their growth and celebrate achievements along the way. These reward systems tap into learners’ intrinsic and extrinsic motivations, encouraging them to persist through challenging material. For example, earning a badge for completing a module or receiving a certificate upon course completion can reinforce a sense of accomplishment and purpose. 

Research also suggests that among game-based learning formats, games may offer greater learning gains compared to virtual worlds or simulations (West et al., 2018). However, the success of any delivery method ultimately depends on how well it aligns with the instructional goals and learner context (West et al., 2018). Effective instructional design ensures that game elements are not just decorative but serve a pedagogical purpose, guiding learners through meaningful challenges that reinforce learning objectives. 

By thoughtfully integrating gamification into MOOCs, designers can enhance both the motivational and instructional quality of the course. When used strategically, these elements support learner autonomy, competence, and relatedness—all key factors in improving learner outcomes and course completion rates. 

Instructional Design Models 

With motivation, engagement, and user experience strategies in place, the next step is to consider how to structure the overall learning experience. Selecting an appropriate instructional design (ID) model is essential to align course objectives, delivery formats, and learner needs. The choice of model often depends on key factors such as whether the course will be synchronous, asynchronous, or a blend of both, as well as the specific context and goals of the MOOC (West et al., 2018). 

Understanding the course context, such as the subject matter, the target audience and their background knowledge, and the types of materials that make the most sense, is essential for designing an effective learning experience. Frameworks like TPACK and the Backward Design process can help identify which resources and digital tools align best with the course objectives and delivery format. For more context, I explore the TPACK model in more detail in a previous article

Guiding Principles 

Establishing clear guiding principles upfront also further ensures the course design remains grounded in sound research and tailored to learners’ needs. For example, a MOOC focused on health behaviors might emphasize principles that support behavior change through interactive, learner-centered activities. These principles will be essential when developing MOOCs using any of the ID models discussed. The example below highlights guiding principles for this specific use case. 

Guiding Principles for Health Behaviors (Müller et al., 2024)

The ADDIE Model 

The ADDIE model offers a progressive, foundational framework for instructional design. It’s often seen as the overarching structure under which more specific models operate (West et al., 2018). What makes ADDIE particularly useful for MOOCs is its adaptability and its emphasis on thoughtful planning and evaluation at each phase of course development. 

  1. Analyze 
    The first step is all about understanding the problem and identifying the performance gap (West et al., 2018). In the context of MOOCs, this means taking time to analyze the course topic, audience, and learning goals. A user-centered approach (UCD) can be especially helpful here by using tools like personas, user stories, and learner motivation mapping to clarify who your learners are and what they need (West et al., 2018). This is also where guiding principles can be defined, helping shape decisions around platform choice (e.g., Coursera, Udemy, or an institutional LMS) and ensuring the course meets learner expectations. 
  1. Design 
    Once the course goals and audience are clear, the next step involves planning how learning will happen. During the design phase, prototyping tools and wireframing can support early ideation around content structure and user flow. Designers should verify learning outcomes, map them to assessments, and build a plan for content delivery that suits the learning format—whether it’s synchronous, asynchronous, or hybrid (West et al., 2018). 
  1. Develop 
    This phase is where the course starts coming to life. Instructional materials, videos, assessments, and interactive elements are created and refined. Tools like Articulate 360, Adobe Captivate, and Elucidat can support the development of engaging, accessible content tailored to diverse learners. 
  1. Implement 
    In the implementation phase, the course is launched and delivered to learners. This involves preparing the learning environment, onboarding students, and ensuring the platform is functioning as intended. Facilitators may also play a role in supporting learners during this phase, particularly in moderated or semi-synchronous MOOCs. 
  1. Evaluate 
    Finally, while evaluation takes place throughout the design process, it becomes more formal in this final stage. This includes gathering formative feedback during development, analyzing collected data, and assessing the quality of instructional processes after the course launch (West et al., 2018). Importantly, this phase should consider learner feedback, platform analytics, and learner engagement data to measure what’s working and what isn’t. 

Some researchers argue that because MOOCs are meant to attract a diverse and potentially unlimited number of learners, this challenges the ADDIE model’s emphasis on analyzing learners and their contexts at the start of the design process (Müller et al., 2024). For example, it may be unrealistic to expect that badges will engage all learners effectively, given that many MOOC participants focus only on select topics instead of the entire course. Based on this, some suggest that ADDIE may not be the ideal model for MOOC design and development. 

While I understand the basis for this argument, I believe the analysis phase can still be highly effective when it includes a deep understanding of learner motivations and a clear definition of the target audience and their intentions for the course. Gathering this information and tailoring strategies to fit the MOOC context can significantly increase learner engagement and completion rates. 

That’s why establishing clear guiding principles early in the design process is so important as it ensures the course remains focused and meaningful for the people it’s designed to serve. 

The Successive Approximation Model (SAM) 

SAM is a simplified, agile version of ADDIE with three iterative phases: Evaluate, Design, and Develop (Rogers-Estable et al., 2015). Its focus on real-time feedback allows for a more flexible and responsive course design process, which is especially helpful in dynamic environments like MOOCs. 

The Successive Approximation Model (Rogers-Estable et al., 2015)
  1. Evaluate 

This phase centers on understanding the course context and learner needs. Key questions include: 

  • Who is the target audience? 
  • What are their goals and tech skills? 
  • What learning format will be used? 
  • Are prerequisites or tutorials needed? 
  • How will learning be assessed? 
  1. Design 

This phase involves planning course structure, storyboarding videos, outlining assessments, and organizing content. Like ADDIE, it ensures alignment with learning goals, but allows more flexibility for change as feedback comes in (Rogers-Estable et al., 2015). 

  1. Develop 

Designs are built, tested, and refined. Because of its iterative nature, SAM supports continuous improvement as new learner feedback and needs emerge. 

While SAM faces similar challenges as ADDIE when it comes to MOOCs, particularly the difficulty of precisely analyzing such a broad audience, it offers unique advantages. Its agile framework makes it more efficient to make adjustments as new learner needs emerge, which is especially valuable in open-enrollment environments. 

Additionally, SAM is most effective when used alongside the backward design model (UbD) (Rogers-Estable et al., 2015). Like backward design, SAM is encouraged to start with clear, measurable course outcomes and designing everything else—activities, content, tools—to align with those end goals. This ensures that each element of the course serves a specific purpose and contributes to the intended learning experience.  

By applying guiding principles, SAM begins by identifying the desired competencies and course outcomes, then works backward to ensure all content and assessments are aligned with those goals. 

Conclusion 

MOOCs have undeniably transformed access to education, providing unprecedented opportunities for learners worldwide. However, the persistent challenges of low completion rates and uneven engagement highlight that accessibility alone is not enough to ensure meaningful learning. As demonstrated, the key to unlocking the full potential of MOOCs lies in thoughtful instructional design—one that intentionally integrates motivation theory, active learning, human connection, user experience, and gamification. 

By addressing learners’ psychological needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness, and by creating interactive, community-oriented environments, MOOCs can provide deeper engagement and sustained motivation. Additionally, applying user-centered design (UCD) principles ensures that learners can focus on the content without unnecessary obstacles, while gamification adds an element of play and achievement that supports persistence. 

Finally, adopting flexible, research-based instructional design models like ADDIE offers a structured framework for developing MOOCs that align with diverse learner goals and contexts. However, given the dynamic nature of MOOCs and their potentially unlimited enrollment, it’s essential to establish guiding principles before analyzing and gathering context within any design model. When these elements come together, MOOCs can transform from simple open-access platforms into dynamic, supportive, and effective learning experiences—expanding educational reach while helping learners achieve their personal and professional goals. 


References 

Jain, B., & Roy, S. kumar. (2024). Student Motivation in Online Learning. ResearchGate. https://doi.org/10.48047/INTJECSE/V14I1.540 

Jordan, K. (2015). Massive open online course completion rates revisited: Assessment, length and attrition. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 16(3). https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v16i3.2112 

Loizzo, J. L. (2015). Adult learners’ perceptions of MOOC motivation, success, and completion: A virtual ethnographic study. Theses and Dissertations Available from ProQuest, 1–300. 

Müller, A. M., Tan, C., Goh, C., & Lim, R. B. T. (2024). The Design of a MOOC on Health Behaviors: A Practical Blueprint for the Instructional Design of MOOCs. Qeios. https://doi.org/10.32388/6XQZ6F 

Rogers-Estable, M., Cavanaugh, C., Simonson, M., Finucane, T., & McIntosh, A. (2015, August 12). 4. Instructional Design Principles | Virtual Learning Design and Delivery. https://courses.lumenlearning.com/virtuallearningdesigndelivery/chapter/4-instructional-design-principles/#chapter-30-section-3 

West, R. E. et al. (2018). Foundations of Learning and Instructional Design Technology. https://edtechbooks.s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/pdfs/3/_3.pdf 

Zhu, M., Bonk, C. J., & Berri, S. (2022). Fostering self-directed learning in MOOCs: Motivation, learning strategies, and instruction. Online Learning, 26(1), Article 1. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v26i1.2629 

Empowering Educators: Ethical and Practical Strategies for AI Adoption in Higher Ed

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is reshaping higher education through tools that enhance teaching, learning, and research. Yet, adoption among faculty remains inconsistent, often hindered by ethical concerns, limited confidence, and uncertainty about educational value. 

Supporting faculty adoption requires collaborative practices that not only build competence but also align with the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) and international ethical standards. UNESCO’s five-part framework for AI competence, which emphasizes human-centered, ethical, and pedagogically sound use, offers a foundation for such alignment. 

Understanding which collaborative approaches best support ethical and motivated AI adoption is essential to ensuring responsible and sustained innovation in higher education. 

Foundations of AI Competency: UNESCO’s Five Aspects 

Before faculty can confidently adopt AI tools in higher education, it’s important to start with a strong foundation in AI literacy and competency. UNESCO’s AI Competency Framework for Teachers outlines five key areas that help educators think critically about AI in ethical, human-centered, and instructionally meaningful ways. These aspects not only support individual growth but also provide a solid starting point for institutions working to align AI use with core educational values. 

1. Human-Centered Approach 

A human-centered mindset places educators and learners at the core of any AI enhanced experience. Educators remain the key decision-makers, shaping both how they engage with AI and how they interpret its outputs. This mindset invites thoughtful reflection on the role of AI in education, with particular attention to protecting human rights, preserving individual agency, and promoting overall well-being (Miao & Cukurova, 2024). It also connects with the Human AI Human (HAIH) model discussed in one of my earlier articles, which emphasizes using AI to enhance—rather than replace—human judgment and connection. 

2. Ethical Use 

Ethical AI use calls educators to actively consider equity, bias, data privacy, and responsible design when engaging with AI tools. As AI technologies continue to advance, it’s important for educators to grow in their ability to question fairness, transparency, and accountability. Developing competency in AI ethics helps faculty assess tools before bringing them into the classroom, safeguard student data, and demonstrate responsible digital practices (Miao & Cukurova, 2024). It also involves recognizing how institutional policies and international ethical standards shape the use of AI in education. 

3. AI Foundations and Applications 

To make informed decisions about AI integration, educators must have a baseline understanding of how AI works and what it can (and cannot) do. This includes familiarity with the many different types of AI, how AI works, and their practical applications. Foundational knowledge helps faculty assess which tools meet specific teaching needs and how to use them safely and effectively. Over time, this knowledge supports creative adaptation of AI tools for student-centered learning environments, ensuring alignment with instructional goals and ethical practices (Miao & Cukurova, 2024). 

4. AI Pedagogy 

Bringing AI into instruction isn’t just about knowing how to use the tools, it’s about making thoughtful decisions rooted in sound pedagogy. AI pedagogy encourages educators to consider how AI can enhance instruction, support social emotional learning, and create more inclusive learning environments (Miao & Cukurova, 2024). It challenges faculty to evaluate when and how to use AI in ways that align with their teaching values while also giving them space to explore new strategies that fit the needs of their students and course goals. 

5. Professional Development 

AI for professional development emphasizes lifelong learning and collaboration. As AI rapidly evolves, educators must remain adaptable and open to continuous growth. This involves using AI to identify areas for growth and to spark ongoing motivation for learning and collaborating with others (Miao & Cukurova, 2024). Institutions can support this by creating formal and informal opportunities for faculty to explore AI tools in guided, low-pressure environments that encourage experimentation and reflection. 

Building Toward AI Competency 

Developing AI competency requires intentional practice, reflection, and a willingness to grow. Educators bring varied levels of experience and understanding to the table—some may be familiar with basic AI tools but lack deeper insight into their ethical use, while others may resist AI entirely due to uncertainty, fear of diminished engagement, or concerns about its impact on traditional learning. These reactions aren’t new. Education has long wrestled with the adoption of emerging technologies. 

For example, educators initially resisted calculators in math classrooms, as well as expressed skepticism about social media’s place in learning. Even Socrates feared that written text would undermine foundational educational practice for memorization (Kim et al., 2025).  

Despite these concerns, education eventually adapts. AI represents the latest wave of innovation. Like the tools that came before it, its role in society is expanding, and education will continue learning how to integrate it meaningfully. 

Instructional Technologists (IT) can play a key role in supporting this transition. The Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) offers a helpful framework for understanding faculty attitudes and hesitations toward AI (Scherer & Teo, 2019). Using this model, IT’s can gather insights into faculty perspectives and tailor guidance around specific AI tools and instructional needs. With time, support, and continued exposure, educators can grow in their AI competency and align their practice with the foundational aspects outlined in UNESCO’s framework. 

What do TAM studies suggest about AI adoption in higher education? 

TAM provides a valuable framework for understanding how and why educators adopt new technologies. At its core, TAM focuses on two key factors: perceived usefulness (PU) and perceived ease of use (PEOU) (Thompson, 2019). These factors shape an educator’s attitude toward technology (ATT) and their behavioral intention (BI) to use it. In other words, the more useful and easy to use a tool is perceived, the more likely educators are to adopt it in their teaching practice. TAM helps educators and Instructional Technologists assess whether a specific tool is worth investing in and guides how to effectively prepare faculty for its implementation. 

(Scherer & Teo, 2019)

Educator and Student Perceptions of AI 

The historical resistance to new technologies in education, as mentioned earlier, provides important context. Education has often been slow to embrace innovation, yet over time, these tools eventually find meaningful roles in pedagogy. AI represents the latest development and, like its predecessors, is poised to continue shaping teaching and learning practices. 

Generative AI is particularly notable due to its versatility and accessibility. It can support students in writing, brainstorming, coding, and receiving personalized feedback. When used effectively, it can promote student autonomy, creativity, and deeper engagement (Kim et al., 2025). However, as with all technologies, AI raises concerns—especially around ethical use and academic integrity. Students may misuse AI to produce inauthentic work, increasing the risk of academic dishonesty. Institutional policies and international frameworks, such as UNESCO’s AI Competency Framework, help address these concerns and guide responsible use. 

It’s important to note that AI should be seen as a tool that complements and enhances human creativity and teaching, not as a replacement for educators. Faculty who understand this role are more likely to embrace AI and integrate it effectively. 

A large study involving 982 students and 76 faculty members at a public U.S. university examined attitudes toward generative AI, with questions addressing ease of use (PEOU), ethical concerns, and its impact on learning (Kim et al., 2025). The results revealed that faculty and students shared similar views on AI integration. However, students reported feeling more comfortable with learning and exploring new tools, suggesting that student adoption may be easier to approach (Kim et al., 2025). The study also revealed significant differences based on gender and academic discipline—males in STEM fields were more likely to have positive attitudes toward AI than females in non-STEM majors (Kim et al., 2025). These findings highlight the importance of developing inclusive strategies to support all learners and educators in adopting AI. 

Similar trends appear in other studies as well, where faculty report moderate to high acceptance of AI and express optimism about its role in education (Nevárez Montes & Elizondo-Garcia, 2025). However, their willingness to adopt these tools often depends on their confidence and understanding. When educators feel adequately prepared, they are more likely to engage with AI in meaningful and effective ways. 

Aspects to Consider for AI Adoption in Higher Education 

Many faculty recognize the potential benefits of AI in education. However, their willingness to incorporate these tools often depends on their confidence and familiarity with the technology (Kim et al., 2025). Intentional training and collaborative opportunities can help educators build both confidence and clarity in using AI tools. As educators engage in focused professional development, their perceptions of AI’s usefulness and ease of use tend to improve. This leads to more positive attitudes and a greater likelihood of adopting AI in their teaching. 

In addition to training and collaboration, highlighting the practical benefits of AI can also boost motivation. AI can help personalize learning, provide intelligent tutoring, and streamline administrative tasks (Nevárez Montes & Elizondo-Garcia, 2025). These advantages not only support students but also improve faculty productivity. 

While further research is needed, it is essential to consider the level and context in which AI is introduced. In advanced courses, such as upper-division computer science, AI tools can enhance learning without replacing essential skill development. In contrast, introducing AI too early in foundational courses may hinder students from building core competencies (Kim et al., 2025). This mirrors the common practice of delaying calculator use until students have mastered basic math skills. 

In conclusion, current research suggests that both faculty and students are interested in exploring AI in education. With institutional support, clear guidelines, and ethical frameworks, this interest can lead to meaningful, responsible adoption that enhances learning while maintaining academic integrity and honesty. 

Collaborative Practices That Foster AI Adoption 

In a previous article, I shared how social and collaborative learning are effective methods for acquiring and retaining new information, particularly when it involves digital tools like AI. These approaches emphasize the importance of fostering a mindset of continuous learning. When educators consistently practice using AI and find ways to integrate it into their teaching, they gradually build confidence and improve their overall AI competency. 

One of the best ways to support ongoing growth with AI tools is by participating in Professional Learning Communities (PLCs) or Professional Learning Networks (PLNs). These groups, whether formal or informal, give educators space to connect, share resources, and reflect on how AI is being used in their teaching. Collaboration like this not only supports adoption but also builds a deeper appreciation for the work happening across classrooms (Mohammed & Kinyo, 2020). The following practices offer a few ways educators can collaborate effectively in these supportive environments. 

Modeling and Demonstration 

Modeling is a very common practice and can be a powerful tool for helping educators understand how to use AI in their instruction. Whether through peer-led sessions, video tutorials, or recorded walkthroughs, observing how others integrate AI tools into lesson planning and classroom instruction can make the process much more approachable.

For example, here’s a video that demonstrates how to use an AI tool called Khanmigo AI, which supports lesson planning. Seeing others use these tools in real time provides both motivation and practical insight. 

Training Workshops 

Workshops are another valuable way to build confidence with AI tools, especially when they’re designed with flexibility in mind. Offering sessions in various formats, like in-person, hybrid, or on-demand recordings, helps meet educators where they are. A strong workshop might open with a quick demo or overview, then shift into collaborative time for discussion, questions, or hands-on exploration. This kind of structure gives space to see AI in action while also connecting it directly to one’s own instructional needs. When workshops feel relevant and practical, it’s easier to see where AI fits in the classroom. 

Hands-On Guidance and Experimentation 

Sometimes, the best way to learn a new digital tool is by simply experimenting with it and gaining hands-on experience. Understanding how AI works at a foundational level makes it easier for educators to adopt new AI tools and integrate them into their teaching. This process also helps improve their attitudes and behavioral intention in adopting AI, as their perceptions of the tool’s usefulness and ease of use become clearer. This hands-on approach can be further supported through sandbox environments, mentorship, and co-teaching sessions, allowing educators the freedom to explore AI tools without the pressure of getting everything perfect. 

Using Technology Integration Models 

To integrate AI tools meaningfully into pedagogy, it’s also helpful to lean on established technology integration frameworks. While I’ll explore these in more detail in a future article, two foundational models are worth briefly introducing here: 

  • TPACK – The Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) framework highlights the intersection of content knowledge, pedagogical knowledge, and technological knowledge (West et al., 2018). For example, an educator teaching English Language Arts (content) might design objectives that align with student discussion and textual analysis (pedagogy). From there, the teacher can choose an AI tool (technology)—such as a chatbot for character analysis—that supports those learning outcomes. This intentional alignment helps ensure that AI use enhances, rather than distracts from, instruction. 
  • SAMR – The Substitution, Augmentation, Modification, and Redefinition (SAMR) model helps educators consider how technology changes the task itself (West et al., 2018). AI tools can substitute a traditional method (e.g., generating feedback instead of peer review), augment or improve an existing process, modify the learning experience, or redefine what learning looks like entirely. Using SAMR, educators can evaluate whether an AI tool merely replaces a current activity or enables deeper engagement and skill-building. 

Conclusion 

In conclusion, AI holds significant potential to transform higher education, but its successful adoption by faculty requires careful consideration of both ethical practices and instructional needs. By fostering AI competency through frameworks like UNESCO’s AI Competency Framework, educators can align their practices with ethical standards and pedagogical goals. Collaborative strategies, including hands-on experimentation, mentorship, and professional learning communities (PLCs), further support the integration of AI into teaching. These approaches not only build practical skills but also promote a deeper understanding of AI tools, which can positively influence educators’ perceived usefulness and ease of use of these technologies. As familiarity and confidence grow, so too does a more favorable attitude toward AI adoption and a stronger behavioral intention to integrate it into teaching. As AI tools continue to evolve, ongoing professional development and the use of established technology integration models such as TPACK and SAMR will help educators meaningfully incorporate AI in ways that enhance learning and preserve academic integrity. Ultimately, when supported by institutional frameworks and collaborative environments, educators will be empowered to use AI tools effectively, creating a more innovative, inclusive, and ethically grounded educational experience for students. 


References 

Kim, J., Klopfer, M., Grohs, J. R., Eldardiry, H., Weichert, J., Cox, L. A., & Pike, D. (2025). Examining Faculty and Student Perceptions of Generative AI in University Courses. Innovative Higher Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-024-09774-w 

Miao, F., & Cukurova, M. (2024). AI competency framework for teachers—UNESCO Digital Library. UNESCO. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000391104 

Mohammed, S., & Kinyo, L. (2020). CONSTRUCTIVIST THEORY AS A FOUNDATION FOR THE UTILIZATION OF DIGITAL TECHNOLOGY IN THE LIFELONG LEARNING PROCESS. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 90–109. https://doi.org/10.17718/tojde.803364    

Nevárez Montes, J., & Elizondo-Garcia, J. (2025). Faculty acceptance and use of generative artificial intelligence in their practice. Frontiers in Education, 10, 1427450. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2025.1427450 

Scherer, R., & Teo, T. (2019). Unpacking teachers’ intentions to integrate technology: A meta-analysis. Educational Research Review, 27, 90–109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2019.03.001 

Thompson, P. (2019). Foundations of Educational Technology. Oklahoma State University Libraries. https://doi.org/10.22488/okstate.19.000002 

West, R. E. et al. (2018). Foundations of Learning and Instructional Design Technology. https://edtechbooks.s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/pdfs/3/_3.pdf