Enhancing Curriculum Development with Gen AI: Data-Informed Strategies for Academic Leaders
Abstract
The study examines the strategies and models for inclusive use of GenAI for academic leadership and data-informed decision-making in the development of higher education curriculum. Educational institutions need to have an organized structure and leadership support to guide them in the development of their educational design using AI tools and the personalization of learning to create inclusivity. The study employs a comprehensive literature review to identify five key components, including GenAI capability, data-informed strategies, ethical curriculum design, curriculum leadership decision making and curriculum reform. The research provides a conceptual framework that links the five dimensions with a thorough analysis. Both pedagogical coherence and organizational leadership are analyzed within the theoretical framework of the Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) framework and Transformational Leadership Theory. The research also contains a detailed questionnaire based on validated academic instruments to aid future empirical testing. Academic leaders can leverage ethical and strategic deployment of GenAI to innovate curriculum, as an evidence-based and inclusive approach. The research offers a thorough theoretical background with empirical evidence and insights into the potential of GenAI to revolutionize curriculum in educational Institutions.
Full text article
References
Bagozzi, R. P., & Yi, Y. (1988). On the evaluation of structural equation models. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 16 (1), 74-94. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02723327
Bakharia, A. & Abdi, S. (2024). Shaping programming and data science education: Insights from GenAI technical book trends. 2024 IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT), pp. 116-120, DOI Bookmark: 10.1109/ICALT61570.2024.00040
Bektik, D. and Others. (2024). AI-Powered Curricula: Unpacking the Potential and Progress of Generative Technologies in Education. Ubiquity Proceedings. P. 38, DOI: 10.5334/uproc.160
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51 (6), 1173-1182.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1173
Bass, B. M., & Riggio, R. E. (2006). Transformational Leadership. (2nd ed.). Psychology Press. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410617095
Chin, W. W. (1998). The partial least squares approach to structural equation modeling. In G. A. Marcoulides (Ed.), Modern Methods for Business Research. pp. 295-336. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Crompton, H., & Burke, D. (2018). The use of mobile learning in higher education: A systematic review. Computers & Education, 123, 53-64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.04.007
Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13 (3), 319-340. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008
Delgado-Ruiz, R., et al. (2024). Generative artificial intelligence (Gen AI) in dental education: Opportunities, cautions, and recommendations. Journal of Dental Education. 89 (1):130-136. https:// DOI: 10.1002/jdd.13688
Duca, A. L. (2024). Using Retrieval Augmented Generation to Build the Context for Data-Driven Stories, In: Proceedings of the 19th International Joint Conference on Computer Vision, Imaging and Computer Graphics Theory and Applications (VISIGRAPP 2024) – Vol. 1, pp. 690-696. DOI: 10.5220/0012419700003660
Dwivedi, Y. K., and Others. (2023). Opinion Paper: “So what if ChatGPT wrote it?” Multidisciplinary perspectives on opportunities, challenges and implications of generative conversational AI for research, practice and policy. International Journal of Information Management, 71, 102642. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2023.102642
Field, A. (2018). Discovering Statistics Using IBM SPSS Statistics. (5th ed.). Sage Publications.
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39-50. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378101800104
Franke, G., & Sarstedt, M. (2019). Heuristics versus statistics in discriminant validity testing: A comparison of four procedures. Internet Research, 29 (3), 430-447. https://doi.org/10.1108/IntR-12-2017-0515
Fullan, M. (2020). Leading in a culture of change. Educational Leadership, 77 (8), 12- 18.
Geisser, S. (1974). A predictive approach to the random effect model. Biometrika, 61 (1), 101-107. https://doi.org/10.1093/biomet/61.1.101
Gold, A. H., Malhotra, A., & Segars, A. H. (2001). Knowledge management: An organizational capabilities perspective. Journal of Management Information Systems, 18 (1), 185-214. https://doi.org/10.1080/07421222.2001.11045669
Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2019). A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) (2nd ed.). Sage Publications.
Hair, J. F., Hult and Others. (2021). Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) Using R: A Workbook. Springer Nature. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-80519-7
Hayes, A. F. (2018). Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Analysis: A Regression-based Approach. (2nd ed.). Guilford Press.
Henseler, J., Hubona, G., & Ray, P. A. (2016). Using PLS ath modeling in new technology research: Updated guidelines. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 116 (1), 2-20. https://doi.org/10.1108/IMDS-09-2015-0382
Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2015). A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43 (1), 115-135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-014- 0403-8
Holmes, W. and Others. (2022). Ethics of AI in education: Towards a community-wide framework. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 32 (3), 504-526. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-021-00239-1Kenny, D. A. (2018).
Johnson, M. (2024). Generative AI and CS Education, Communications of the ACM, Vol. 67, Issue 4, pp. 23-24. https://doi.org/10.1145/3632523
Kamaruddin, N., et al. (2023). Enhancing Talent Development Using AI-Driven Curriculum-Industry Integration. Environment-Behaviour Proceedings Journal, Vol. 8 No. 26. Doi: https://doi.org/10.21834/e-bpj.v8i26.5129
Kasztelnik, K. (2024). Artificial Intelligence-Assisted Curriculum Development: Innovations in Designing Educational Content for the 21st Century Learner. Journal of Higher Education Theory and Practice, Vol. 24, No. 11. Doi: https://doi.org/10.33423/jhetp.v24i11.7367
Kurtz, G. and Others. (2024). Strategies for Integrating Generative AI into Higher Education: Navigating Challenges and Leveraging Opportunities. Education sciences, Vol. 14, No. 5. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14050503
Kline, R. B. (2016). Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling. (4th ed.). Guilford Press.
Kock, N. (2015). Common method bias in PLS-SEM: A full collinearity assessment approach. International Journal of e-Collaboration, 11 (4), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.4018/ijec.2015100101
Kock, N., & Lynn, G. S. (2012). Lateral collinearity and misleading results in variance- based SEM: An illustration and recommendations. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 13 (7), 546-580. https://doi.org/10.17705/1jais.00302
Lee, S. S. and Others. (2024). Harnessing Generative AI (GenAI) for Automated Feedback in Higher Education: A Systematic Review. Online Learning Journal, Vol. 28, No. 3. Doi: https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v28i3.4593
MacKinnon, D. P., Fairchild, A. J., & Fritz, M. S. (2007). Mediation analysis. Annual Review of Psychology, 58, 593-614. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.58.110405.085542
Marsh, J. A. (2012). Interventions promoting educators’ use of data: Research insights and gaps. Teachers College Record, 114 (11), 1-48.
https://doi.org/10.1177/016146811211401106
Martilla, J. A., & James, J. C. (1977). Importance-performance analysis. Journal of Marketing, 41 (1), 77-79. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224297704100112
Means, B., Padilla, C., & Gallagher, L. (2013). Use of Education Data at the Local Level: From Accountability to Instructional Improvement. US Department of Education, Office of Planning, Evaluation and Policy Development.
Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108 (6), 1017-1054. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9620.2006.00684.x
Ngozi, B., and Others. (2024). Leveraging Artificial Intelligence for an inclusive and diversified curriculum. World Journal of Advanced Research and Reviews, May,(Vol. 30, No. 2). https://doi.org/10.30574/wjarr.2024.23.2.2440
Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). McGraw-Hill.
Pane, J. F., Steiner, E. D., Baird, M. D., & Hamilton, L. S. (2017). Continued Progress: Promising Evidence on Personalized Learning. RAND Corporation. https://doi.org/10.7249/RR1365
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88 (5), 879-903.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879
Prain, V., Cox, P., Deed, C., Dorman, J., Edwards, D., Farrelly, C., Keeffe, M., Lovejoy, V., Mow, L., Sellings, P., Waldrip, B., & Yager, Z. (2013). Personalised learning: Lessons to be learnt. British Educational Research Journal, 39 (4), 654-676. https://doi.org/10.1080/01411926.2012.669747
Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40 (3), 879-891. https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.40.3.879
Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2016). Gain more insight from your PLS-SEM results: The importance-performance map analysis, Industrial Management & Data Systems, 116 (9), 1865-1886. https://doi.org/10.1108/IMDS-10-2015-0449
Sarstedt, M., Hair, J. F., Nitzl, C., Ringle, C. M., & Howard, M. C. (2021). Beyond a tandem analysis of SEM and PROCESS: Use of PLS-SEM for mediation analyses, International Journal of Market Research, 62 (3), 288-299.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1470785320915686
Schein, E. H. (2010). Organizational Culture and Leadership. (4th ed.). Jossey-Bass.
Schmidt, G. B., and Others. (2024). Considerations of Using Generative Artificial Intelligence in an Academic Leadership Role. The Department Chair, Vol. 35, No. 1. Pp. 14-16.
Shimizu, I., and Others. (2023). Developing Medical Education Curriculum Reform Strategies to Address the Impact of Generative AI: Qualitative Study. JMIR Medical Education, Nov. 30: 9, Doi: 10.2196/53466.
Shmueli, G., Sarstedt, M., Hair, J. F., Cheah, J. H., Ting, H., Vaithilingam, S., & Ringle,
C. M. (2019). Predictive model assessment in PLS-SEM: Guidelines for using PLSpredict. European Journal of Marketing, 53 (11), 2322-2347.
https://doi.org/10.1108/EJM-02-2019-0189
Slack, N. (1994). The importance-performance matrix as a determinant of improvement priority. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 14 (5), 59-75. https://doi.org/10.1108/01443579410056803
Stone, M. (1974). Cross-validatory choice and assessment of statistical predictions. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B (Methodological), 36 (2), 111-133. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2517-6161.1974.tb00994.x
Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2019). Using Multivariate Statistics. (7th ed.). Pearson.
Tarisayi, K. S. (2023). Strategic leadership for responsible artificial intelligence adoption in higher education. CTE Workshop Proceedings, 11:4-14. DOI:10.55056/cte.616
Venkatesh, V., Thong, J. Y., & Xu, X. (2016). Unified theory of acceptance and use of technology: A synthesis and the road ahead. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 17 (5), 328-376. https://doi.org/10.17705/1jais.00428
Williamson, B. (2017). Big Data in Education: The Digital Future of Learning, Policy and Practice. Sage Publications.
Zhao, X., Lynch Jr, J. G., & Chen, Q. (2010). Reconsidering Baron and Kenny: Myths and truths about mediation analysis. Journal of Consumer Research, 37 (2), 197-206. https://doi.org/10.1086/651257
Authors
Copyright (c) 2026 The Arab Journal of Administration
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.