VERS UNE LITTÉRATIE NUMÉRIQUE POUR UN USAGE RESPONSABLE DE L’INTELLIGENCE ARTIFICIELLE GÉNÉRATIVE DANS LES UNIVERSITÉS / TOWARDS DIGITAL LITERACY FOR THE RESPONSIBLE USE OF GENERATIVE ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE IN UNIVERSITIES

Josué Ngwej Mpandamadi, Jacques Mwela Mutuntuka, Boniface Aspan A Kasas, Basile Mulwani Makelele

Abstract


Les pratiques pédagogiques et la recherche dans l’enseignement supérieur et universitaire subissent des mutations notables depuis le début de la révolution de l’intelligence artificielle Générative (IAG). Les enseignants, les étudiants et gestionnaires recourent aux outils numériques de l’IAG pour programmer les enseignements, les dispenser, les apprendre et les évaluer. Une innovation éducative certes, mais qui soulève encore des enjeux éthiques, épistémiques et sociétaux majeurs. Par une recension de la littérature, cette étude vise à explorer la structuration scientifique des recherches sur l’IAG éducative publiées entre 2021 et 2025, en mettant l’accent sur la notion de littératie numérique et l’usage responsable des technologies intelligentes. Un corpus de 70 publications internationales postées sur internet a été répertorié, codé dans SPSS, et les analyses descriptives et corrélationnelles ont été effectuées. Notamment, Une analyse thématique a été réalisée selon la méthode de Braun et Clarke et une analyse statistique complémentaire menée par les corrélations de Pearson, Spearman, α de Cronbach. Et les résultats révèlent une forte cohérence interne entre les dimensions méthodologiques, discursives et thématiques de ces publications. Par ailleurs, trois axes scientifiques s’imposent : un axe empirique et pédagogique centré sur l’apprentissage personnalisé ; un axe institutionnel axé sur la gouvernance et la qualité académique ; et un axe prospectif orienté vers l’éthique et l’inclusion. Et l’ensemble des corrélations significatives témoigne d’une maturité croissante du domaine scientifique d’études sur l’IAG, où la littératie numérique devient le pivot conceptuel d’une éducation à l’IAG fondée sur la responsabilité, la réflexivité et la justice numérique.

 

Through a literature review, this study aims to examine the scientific structuring of research on educational GAI published between 2021 and 2025, with particular emphasis on digital literacy and the responsible use of intelligent technologies. A corpus of 70 international publications available online was identified, coded in SPSS, and analyzed using descriptive and correlational methods. A thematic analysis was conducted following Braun and Clarke’s approach, and complementary statistical analyses were performed using Pearson and Spearman correlations, as well as Cronbach’s alpha. The findings reveal strong internal coherence across the methodological, discursive, and thematic dimensions of these publications. Furthermore, three major scientific clusters emerge: an empirical and pedagogical cluster focused on personalized learning; an institutional cluster centered on governance and academic quality; and a prospective cluster oriented toward ethics and inclusion. Overall, the significant correlations indicate a growing maturity in the scientific field of GAI studies, where digital literacy becomes the conceptual cornerstone of GAI education grounded in responsibility, reflexivity, and digital justice.


Keywords


pédagogie universitaire, éthique en recherche, intelligence artificielle générative, littératie numérique / university pedagogy, research ethics, generative artificial intelligence, digital literacy

Full Text:

PDF

References


Akgun, S., & Greenhow, C. (2024). Artificial Intelligence Literacy in Higher Education: A Framework for Responsible Pedagogy. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence, 7(2), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.3389/frai.2024.129834

Ayele, T., & Kihoro, J. (2024). Digital sovereignty and inclusive artificial intelligence in African higher education: Challenges and prospects. Computers & Education: Artificial Intelligence, 6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2024.100209

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2021). Thematic Analysis: A Practical Guide. Sage Publications. Retrieved from https://www.sagepub.com/shop/buy-a-book/thematic-analysis-1-248481

Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches. Sage. Retrieved from https://books.google.ro/books/about/Research_Design.html?id=4uB76IC_pOQC&redir_esc=y

Chiu, T. K. F. (2022). Digital Literacy for AI-based Learning Environments: A Systematic Review. Computers & Education, 190(1).

Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches. Sage. Retrieved from https://books.google.ro/books?id=PViMtOnJ1LcC&printsec=frontcover&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false

Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2018). Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research (3rd ed.). Sage. Retrieved from https://books.google.ro/books/about/Designing_and_Conducting_Mixed_Methods_R.html?id=eTwmDwAAQBAJ&redir_esc=y

European Commission. (2021). Ethics Guidelines for Trustworthy AI. Brussels: EC Publications. Retrieved from https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/library/ethics-guidelines-trustworthy-ai

Floridi, L., & Cowls, J. (2019). A Unified Framework of Five Principles for AI in Society. Harvard Data Science Review, 1(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1162/99608f92.8cd550d1

Gilster, P. (1997). Digital Literacy. New York: Wiley. Retrieved from https://books.google.ro/books/about/Digital_Literacy.html?hl=id&id=ppVx7pHr07kC&redir_esc=y

Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1994). Competing Paradigms in Qualitative Research. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.) Handbook of Qualitative Research, 105–117. Sage Publications, Inc. Retrieved from https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1994-98625-005

Holmes, W., Bialik, M., & Fadel, C. (2023). Artificial intelligence in education. In Data ethics: Building trust (pp. 621–650). Globethics Publications. https://doi.org/10.58863/20.500.12424/4276068

Kucirkova, N. (2023). Critical AI Literacy: A New Imperative for Educators. Computers & Education: Artificial Intelligence, 5(3).

Luckin, R., & Cukurova, M. (2019). Designing Educational Technologies for Responsible Learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(6), 2970–2986.

Markauskaite, L., & Goodyear, P. (2017). Epistemic Fluency and Professional Education. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-4369-4

Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., & Altman, D. G. (2015). Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement. PLoS Medicine, 6(7). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097

Mulwani Makelele, B. et Ngoy Ndala, V. (2026). L’intelligence artificielle dans la pédagogie universitaire en Afrique : usages, perceptions et enjeux éthiques chez les étudiants. In Recherches Et Pratiques Psychologiques En Afrique. Paris: L’Harmattan

Mulwani Makelele, B., Sukadi Mangwa, C., and Nzuzi Mavungu, G. (2026). Integration of a Personalized Generative AI into University Instructional Design: Contributions, Uses, and Conditions for the Effectiveness of Active Learning Methods. American Journal of Educational Research, vol. 14, no. 3: 107-113. https://doi.org/10.12691/education-14-3-5

Ng, W. (2012). Can We Teach Digital Natives Digital Literacy? Computers & Education, 59(3), 1065–1078. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.04.016

Nunnally, J. (1978). Psychometric Methods. 2nd Edition, McGraw-Hill, New York. Retrieved from https://books.google.ro/books/about/Psychometric_Theory.html?id=WE59AAAAMAAJ&redir_esc=y

Niyonzima, J. B. (2023). Artificial intelligence and higher education in Africa: Toward inclusive and context-sensitive innovation. International Journal of Educational Development, 98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedudev.2023.102743

OpenAI Policy Lab. (2025). Towards a Global Pact for Responsible Academic AI Use. OpenAI Education Policy Series.

Siemens, G. (2022). Learning analytics and the future of higher education. EDUCAUSE. https://www.educause.edu

Tashakkori, A. & Teddlie, C. (2010). SAGE handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research (2nd ed.). SAGE Publications. Retrieved from https://methods.sagepub.com/hnbk/edvol/sage-handbook-of-mixed-methods-social-behavioral-research-2e/toc#_

Tondeur, J., Siddiq, F., & Scherer, R. (2022). Development of AI Literacy in Teacher Education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 117(1), 103799.

UNESCO. (2018). A Global Framework for Media and Information Literacy. Paris: UNESCO.

UNESCO. (2024a). AI and Education: Guidance for Policymakers. Paris: UNESCO. Retrieved from https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000376709

UNESCO. (2024b). AI in Education: Policy Review for Sub-Saharan Africa. UNESCO Publishing.

UNESCO-IESALC. (2023). Artificial Intelligence and Higher Education in Latin America and the Caribbean. Caracas: IESALC.

Zawacki-Richter, O., & Kerres, M. (2023). Artificial Intelligence and Higher Education: Critical Perspectives on Ethical and Pedagogical Issues. Computers & Education, 194, 104674.

Zawacki-Richter, O., Marín, V. I., Bond, M., & Gouverneur, F. (2019). Systematic Review of Research on Artificial Intelligence Applications in Higher Education. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 16(1), 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-019-0171-0




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.46827/ejoe.v11i2.7009

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright © 2016-2026. European Journal of Open Education and E-learning Studies (ISSN 2501-9120) is a registered trademark of Open Access Publishing GroupAll rights reserved.

This journal is a serial publication uniquely identified by an International Standard Serial Number (ISSN) serial number certificate issued by Romanian National Library (Biblioteca Nationala a Romaniei). All the research works are uniquely identified by a CrossRef DOI digital object identifier supplied by indexing and repository platforms.

All the research works published on this journal are meeting the Open Access Publishing requirements and can be freely accessed, shared, modified, distributed and used in educational, commercial and non-commercial purposes under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0).