Decoding medical educators’ perceptions on generative artificial intelligence in medical education

Abstract

Generative AI (GenAI) is a disruptive technology likely to generate a major impact on faculty and learners in medical education. This work aims to measure the perception of GenAI among medical educators and to gain insights into its major advantages and concerns in medical education. A survey invitation was distributed to medical education faculty of colleges of allopathic and osteopathic medicine within a single university during the fall of 2023. The survey comprised 12 items, among those assessing the role of GenAI for students and educators, the need to modify teaching approaches, GenAI’s perceived advantages, applications of GenAI in the educational context, and the concerns, challenges, and trustworthiness associated with GenAI. Responses were obtained from 48 faculty. They showed a positive attitude toward GenAI and disagreed on GenAI having a very negative effect on either the students’ or faculty’s educational experience. Eighty-five percent of our medical schools’ faculty responded to had heard about GenAI, while 42% had not used it at all. Generating text (33%), automating repetitive tasks (19%), and creating multimedia content (17%) were some of the common utilizations of GenAI by school faculty. The majority agreed that GenAI is likely to change its role as an educator. A perceived advantage of GenAI in conducting more effective background research was reported by 54% of faculty. The greatest perceived strengths of GenAI were the ability to conduct more efficient research, task automation, and increased content accessibility. The faculty’s major concerns were cheating in home assignments in assessment (97%), tendency for blunder and false information (95%), lack of context (86%), and removal of human interaction in important feedback processes (83%). The majority of the faculty agrees on the lack of guidelines for safe use of GenAI from both a governmental and an institutional policy. The main perceived challenges were cheating, the tendency of GenAI to make errors, and privacy concerns. The faculty recognized the potential impact of GenAI in medical education. Careful deliberation of the pros and cons of GenAI is needed for its effective integration into medical education. There is general agreement that plagiarism and lack of regulations are two major areas of concern. Consensus-based guidelines at the institutional and/or national level need to start to be implemented to govern the appropriate use of GenAI while maintaining ethics and transparency. Faculty responses reflect an optimistic and favorable outlook on GenAI’s impact on student learning.