Nursing academics hold divergent attitudes toward GenAI, from scepticism to pragmatic acceptance, and worry it may replace rather than support student learning¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · qualitative r3 · q2
Currency · newest study 2026 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person · recheck by 2031: baselines and conditions change

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Participants expressed a range of attitudes toward GenAI, including scepticism, pragmatic acceptance, and cautious experimentation. → Dabkowski 2026 q2 i? Participants distinguished GenAI use that supports learning from use that replaces student learning, objecting to the latter. → Dabkowski 2026 (2)

Evidence¶

Dabkowski 2026¶

Dabkowski, Elissa; Missen, Karen; Allen, Louise; Whitehead, Dean; Worn, Ryan. (2026). 'Co-pilot won't teach you to be a nurse': nursing academics' perspectives on GenAI use in undergraduate education. International Journal for Educational Integrity. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40979-026-00220-2

q2 · i? · qualitative · r3

Theme One minor theme on divergent academic attitudes in the 22-participant interview study. Attitudes ranged from scepticism ("It's not original thought") to pragmatic acceptance that students will use GenAI.

"Participants expressed a range of attitudes toward the role of GenAI in nursing education, reflecting both uncertainty and an evolving understanding of its implications for teaching, learning, and academic integrity."

Dabkowski 2026 (2)¶

Dabkowski, Elissa; Missen, Karen; Allen, Louise; Whitehead, Dean; Worn, Ryan. (2026). 'Co-pilot won't teach you to be a nurse': nursing academics' perspectives on GenAI use in undergraduate education. International Journal for Educational Integrity. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40979-026-00220-2

q2 · i? · qualitative · r3

Participant quote (P14) within the divergent-attitudes theme. Academics recognised GenAI's potential to support editing and writing enhancement but cautioned against use that "replaces the student learning".

"It's purely when it replaces the student learning that I have an issue. . they shouldn't be allowed to use it to replace learning"

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Nursing academics fear GenAI overreliance undermines critical thinking, knowledge translation and graduates' readiness for safe clinical practice — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• Nursing students and faculty report concerns that AI use may weaken critical thinking, enable plagiarism and misinformation, and create unequal access — related
• Faculty attitudes toward AI fall into four profiles—optimistic, critical, critically reflective, and neutral—and optimistic faculty with high AI self-efficacy are more likely to adopt AI — a broader claim this one bears on
• Youth hold varied attitudes toward generative AI, with non-users citing concerns about helpfulness, academic integrity, knowledge, privacy, and awareness — related
• Nursing academics link student GenAI misconduct to future unprofessional and unsafe clinical conduct — related
• Student experiences with GenAI in design thinking fall into four themes: perceived benefits, ethical concerns, hesitance and acceptance, and critical validation — related
• First-year MA translation students adopt a cautious, pragmatic approach to GenAI, combining NMT for drafting with LLMs for support tasks — related
• Parental attitudes transformed from scepticism to high trust over the three cycles, with parents of low performers developing high confidence by Cycle 3 — related
• Minority of undergraduate health science students reported using GenAI for reflective writing, mostly to support rather than replace reflection — related