Revolutionizing Education in Zimbabwe: Stakeholder Perspectives on Strategic AI Integration

Kudzayi Tarisayi; Ronald Manhibi

doi:10.53850/joltida.1493508

EN

Revolutionizing Education in Zimbabwe: Stakeholder Perspectives on Strategic AI Integration

Abstract

This paper critically examines the transformative potential of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Zimbabwe’s higher education system, focusing on how AI can enhance learning outcomes and optimize administrative processes. The study employs a qualitative research approach, gathering insights from key stakeholders in the educational sector to identify the strategic opportunities and challenges posed by AI adoption. Drawing from global examples, particularly in higher education, AI technologies such as intelligent tutoring systems, predictive analytics, and automated grading are discussed for their potential to personalize learning experiences, improve student retention, and streamline institutional management. The paper also delves into the ethical and resource-based constraints surrounding AI implementation, including data privacy concerns and financial limitations, which remain significant barriers in developing contexts like Zimbabwe. Recommendations are provided for strategic AI adoption, emphasizing the alignment with national education goals and Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) to ensure that AI fosters inclusivity and equity in education. This analysis highlights the need for a comprehensive policy framework to support responsible AI integration, thereby positioning Zimbabwean institutions for future educational innovation.

Keywords

Artificial Intelligence (AI, Higher Education, AI Readiness, Zimbabwe

Ethical Statement

Ethics and Consent: Ethics committee approval for this study was received from the Ethics Committee of Stellenbosch University - (Date:05 January 2024, Number: CUR-2024-28106).

References

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
Luckman, S. (2016). Virginia Braun and Victoria Clarke, Successful qualitative research: A practical guide for beginners. Feminism & Psychology, 26(3), 387–391. https://doi.org/10.1177/0959353515614115
Carretero, S., Vuorikari, R., & Punie, Y. (2017). DigComp 2.1: The Digital Competence Framework for Citizens with eight proficiency levels and examples of use. Publications Office of the European Union. https://doi.org/10.2760/38842
Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (4th ed.). Sage.
Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008
Eyyam, R., & Yaratan, H. S. (2014). Impact of use of technology in mathematics lessons on student achievement and attitudes. Social Behaviour and Personality: An International Journal, 42(1), 31S-42S. https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.2014.42.0.s31
Valero-Pastor, J. M., García-Avilés, J. A., & Carvajal, M. (2021). Transformational leadership and innovation in digital-only news outlets. Analysis of Quartz and El Confidencial. Journalism Studies, 22(11), 1450–1468. https://doi.org/10.1080/1461670x.2021.1927153
Greenhalgh, T., Robert, G., MacFarlane, F., Bate, P., & Kyriakidou, O. (2004). Diffusion of innovations in service organizations: Systematic review and recommendations. The Milbank Quarterly, 82(4), 581–629. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0887-378x.2004.00325.x
Holmes, W., Bialik, M., & Fadel, C. (2019). Artificial intelligence in education promises and implications for teaching and learning. Centre for Curriculum Redesign.
Jantjies, M., & Joy, M. (2013). Mobile learning through indigenous languages: Learning through a constructivist approach. 12th World Conference on Mobile and Contextual Learning (mLearn 2013). http://dx.doi.org/10.5339/qproc.2013.mlearn.14

Kapoor, K. K., Dwivedi, Y. K., & Williams, M. D. (2014). Rogers’ innovation adoption attributes: A systematic review and synthesis of existing research. Information Systems Management, 31(1), 74–91. https://doi.org/10.1080/10580530.2014.854103
Kitzinger, J. (1995). Qualitative research: Introducing focus groups. BMJ, 311(7000), 299-302.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Sage.
Luckin, R., Cukurova, M., Kent, C., & du Boulay, B. (2022). Empowering educators to be AI-ready. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 3, 100076. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2022.100076
Qian, Y., Siau, K. L., & Nah, F. F. (2024). Societal impacts of artificial intelligence: Ethical, legal, and governance issues. Societal Impacts, 3, 100040. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socimp.2024.100040
Ng, D. T. K., Leung, J. K. L., Su, J., Ng, R. C. W., & Chu, S. K. W. (2023). Teachers’ AI digital competencies and twenty-first , century skills in the post-pandemic world. Educational Technology Research and Development, 71(1), 137–161. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-023-10203-6
Palinkas, L. A., Horwitz, S. M., Green, C. A., Wisdom, J. P., Duan, N., & Hoagwood, K. (2015). Purposeful sampling for qualitative data collection and analysis in mixed method implementation research. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, 42(5), 533-544.
Patrick, S., Wicks, M., & Powell, A. (2023). K–12 online learning. In Assuring Quality in Online Education (pp. 50–63). Routledge. http://dx.doi.org/10.4324/9781003443124-5
Patton, M. Q. (2023). Qualitative research & evaluation methods: Integrating theory and practice. SAGE Publications.
Wareing, S. (2021). Measuring the success of active blended learning. In Advances in Educational Technologies and Instructional Design (pp. 291–302). IGI Global. http://dx.doi.org/10.4018/978-1-7998-7856-8.ch015
Janet, H. (2016). Wearable technology and mobile innovations for next-generation education. IGI Global.
Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of Innovations, 5th edition. Simon and Schuster.
Ruggiero, D., & J. Mong, C. (2015). The teacher technology integration experience: Practice and reflection in the classroom. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 14, 161–178. https://doi.org/10.28945/2227
Tarisayi, K. S. (2024). Strategic leadership for responsible artificial intelligence adoption in higher education. CTE Workshop Proceedings, 11, 4–14. https://doi.org/10.55056/cte.616
Turner, M., Kitchenham, B., Brereton, P., Charters, S., & Budgen, D. (2010). Does the technology acceptance model predict actual use? A systematic literature review. Information and Software Technology, 52(5), 463–479. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2009.11.005
Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (2000). A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies. Management Science, 46(2), 186–204. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.46.2.186.11926
Zawacki-Richter, O., Marín, V. I., Bond, M., & Gouverneur, F. (2019). Systematic review of research on artificial intelligence, applications in higher education – where are the educators? International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher,Education, 16(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-019-0171-0
Bond, M., Khosravi, H., De Laat, M., Bergdahl, N., Negrea, V., Oxley, E., Pham, P., Chong, S. W., & Siemens, G. (2024). A meta systematic review of artificial intelligence in higher education: A call for increased ethics, collaboration, and rigour.International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 21(4). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-023-00436-z
Crompton, H., & Burke, D. (2023). Artificial intelligence in higher education: The state of the field. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 20(22). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-023-00392-8
George, B., & Wooden, O. (2023). Managing the strategic transformation of higher education through artificial intelligence. Administrative Sciences, 13(196). https://doi.org/10.3390/admsci13090196
Opesemowo, O. A., & Adekomaya, V. (2024). Harnessing artificial intelligence for advancing sustainable development goals in South Africa's higher education system: A qualitative study. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 23(3), 67–86. https://doi.org/10.26803/ijlter.23.3.4

Details

Primary Language

English

Subjects

Artificial Intelligence (Other)

Journal Section

Research Article

Authors

Kudzayi Tarisayi ^*
0000-0003-0086-2420
South Africa

Ronald Manhibi
0000-0001-6262-0297
Zimbabwe

Publication Date

January 3, 2025

Submission Date

June 1, 2024

Acceptance Date

November 15, 2024

Published in Issue

Year 2025 Volume: 10 Number: 1

DOI

https://doi.org/10.53850/joltida.1493508

IZ

https://izlik.org/JA69WP44DB

APA

Tarisayi, K., & Manhibi, R. (2025). Revolutionizing Education in Zimbabwe: Stakeholder Perspectives on Strategic AI Integration. Journal of Learning and Teaching in Digital Age, 10(1), 87-93. https://doi.org/10.53850/joltida.1493508

AMA

1.Tarisayi K, Manhibi R. Revolutionizing Education in Zimbabwe: Stakeholder Perspectives on Strategic AI Integration. JOLTIDA. 2025;10(1):87-93. doi:10.53850/joltida.1493508

Chicago

Tarisayi, Kudzayi, and Ronald Manhibi. 2025. “Revolutionizing Education in Zimbabwe: Stakeholder Perspectives on Strategic AI Integration”. Journal of Learning and Teaching in Digital Age 10 (1): 87-93. https://doi.org/10.53850/joltida.1493508.

EndNote

Tarisayi K, Manhibi R (January 1, 2025) Revolutionizing Education in Zimbabwe: Stakeholder Perspectives on Strategic AI Integration. Journal of Learning and Teaching in Digital Age 10 1 87–93.

IEEE

[1]K. Tarisayi and R. Manhibi, “Revolutionizing Education in Zimbabwe: Stakeholder Perspectives on Strategic AI Integration”, JOLTIDA, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 87–93, Jan. 2025, doi: 10.53850/joltida.1493508.

ISNAD

Tarisayi, Kudzayi - Manhibi, Ronald. “Revolutionizing Education in Zimbabwe: Stakeholder Perspectives on Strategic AI Integration”. Journal of Learning and Teaching in Digital Age 10/1 (January 1, 2025): 87-93. https://doi.org/10.53850/joltida.1493508.

JAMA

1.Tarisayi K, Manhibi R. Revolutionizing Education in Zimbabwe: Stakeholder Perspectives on Strategic AI Integration. JOLTIDA. 2025;10:87–93.

MLA

Tarisayi, Kudzayi, and Ronald Manhibi. “Revolutionizing Education in Zimbabwe: Stakeholder Perspectives on Strategic AI Integration”. Journal of Learning and Teaching in Digital Age, vol. 10, no. 1, Jan. 2025, pp. 87-93, doi:10.53850/joltida.1493508.

Vancouver

1.Kudzayi Tarisayi, Ronald Manhibi. Revolutionizing Education in Zimbabwe: Stakeholder Perspectives on Strategic AI Integration. JOLTIDA. 2025 Jan. 1;10(1):87-93. doi:10.53850/joltida.1493508

Cited By

Artificial Intelligence in Higher Education: A Systematic Review of Contributions to SDG 4 (Quality Education) and SDG 10 (Reduced Inequality

SSRN Electronic Journal

https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.5621731

Artificial intelligence in higher education: a systematic review of contributions to SDG 4 (quality education) and SDG 10 (reduced inequality)

International Journal of Educational Management

https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEM-12-2024-0856

Journal of Learning and Teaching in Digital Age 2023. This is an Open Access journal distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution International 4.0 (CC BY 4.0) license.

Journal of Learning and Teaching in Digital Age. Open Access Journal, 2023. ISSN:2458-8350