Kohesi: Jurnal Sains dan Teknologi

Articles

Vol. 10 No. 7 (2025): Kohesi: Jurnal Sains dan Teknologi, ISSN 3025-1311

Integrasi Dimensi Etika Profesi dalam Sistem Pendukung Keputusan Adopsi Kecerdasan Buatan Generatif di Perguruan Tinggi

Submitted
December 16, 2025
Published
2025-12-16

Abstract

Adopsi Kecerdasan Buatan Generatif (GenAI) di perguruan tinggi 
menuntut pengambilan keputusan strategis yang tidak hanya 
didasarkan pada kelayakan teknis, tetapi juga pada kepatuhan 
terhadap standar etika profesi. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk 
membangun basis pengetahuan bagi Sistem Pendukung Keputusan 
(SPK) tata kelola GenAI dengan mengintegrasikan prinsip-prinsip 
etika profesional. Menggunakan pendekatan semantic literature 
review terhadap 595 publikasi peer-reviewed dan 3.808 artikel 
Scopus, studi ini mengidentifikasi dan memvalidasi lima kriteria 
etis utama sebagai parameter keputusan: (1) integritas akademik, 
(2) privasi data, (3) bias algoritma, (4) transparansi sistem, dan 
(5) kesetaraan akses. Hasil analisis menunjukkan bahwa kelima 
dimensi ini merupakan variabel kritis yang harus dipertimbangkan 
oleh administrator dan pendidik dalam merumuskan kebijakan 
adopsi teknologi yang bertanggung jawab. Penelitian ini 
merekomendasikan sebuah kerangka kerja SPK multikriteria yang menempatkan etika profesi sebagai landasan utama dalam 
evaluasi dan seleksi alat GenAI dalam ekosistem pendidikan 
digital.

References

  1. [1] Ng, S.-L., & Ho, C.-C. (2025). Generative AI in education: Mapping the research landscape through bibliometric analysis. Information, 16(8), 657.
  2. https://doi.org/10.3390/info16080657
  3. [2] Tlili, A., Huang, R., Shehata, B., Liu, D., Zhao, J., Metwally, A. H. S., & Wang, H. (2022). Is artificial intelligence a discipline to study or a tool to support studies? A systematic review on artificial intelligence in education research during an era of large language models. Education and Information Technologies, 27(8), 11841–11868.
  4. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11282-5
  5. [3] Selim, H., & Abdullah, S. (2023). The ChatGPT disruption: A study on the speed of AI adoption and its impact on educational policy readiness. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 26(4), 115–130.
  6. [4] Henderson, M., & Williams, J. (2024). The ethics lag: Generative AI and the challenge of institutional policymaking in higher education. Educational Research Review, 41, 100519.
  7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2024.100519
  8. [5] Barrett, A., & Pack, A. (2023). Not quite eye to A.I.: Student and teacher perspectives on the use of generative artificial intelligence in the writing process. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 20(1), Article 59.
  9. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-023-00427-0
  10. [6] IEEE. (2020). Ethically aligned design: A vision for prioritizing human well-being with autonomous and intelligent systems. IEEE Global Initiative on Ethics of Autonomous and Intelligent Systems.
  11. https://standards.ieee.org/industry-connections/ec/autonomous-systems.html
  12. [7] Bender, E. M., Gebru, T., McMillan-Major, A., & Shmitchell, S. (2021). On the dangers of stochastic parrots: Can language models be too big? In Proceedings of the 2021 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (pp. 610–623). ACM.
  13. https://doi.org/10.1145/3442188.3445922
  14. [8] Zhai, X., Chu, X., Chai, C. S., Jong, M. S., Istenic, A., Spector, M., Liu, J. B., Yuan, J., & Shen, S.-T. (2024). A review of artificial intelligence (AI) in education from 2010 to 2021. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 29(3), 369–403.
  15. https://doi.org/10.1177/07356331231172328
  16. [9] Steneck, N. H. (2006). Handbook of research ethics and scientific integrity. Harvard University.
  17. [10] Arar, K. H., Özen, H., Polat, G., & Turan, S. (2025). Artificial intelligence, generative artificial intelligence and research integrity: A hybrid systemic review. Smart Learning Environments, 12(44).
  18. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-025-00403-3
  19. [11] OECD. (2019). OECD principles on artificial intelligence. OECD Publishing.
  20. https://www.oecd.org/going-digital/ai/principles/
  21. [12] Sun, L. (2024). Intersectional ethics: The compounded risks of generative AI in education. AI and Ethics, 4(1), 129–141.
  22. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43681-023-00349-z
  23. [13] Bozkurt, A. (2024). Authentic knowledge building in the age of generative AI: Challenges and strategies. Open Learning: The Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning, 39(2), 189–203.
  24. [14] Johnson, M., & Lee, S. (2023). Augmented minds: Designing ethical AI for human-in-the-loop education. MIT Press.
  25. [15] Petticrew, M., & Roberts, H. (2006). Systematic reviews in the social sciences: A practical guide. Blackwell Publishing.
  26. [16] Aria, M., & Cuccurullo, C. (2017). bibliometrix: An R-tool for comprehensive science mapping analysis. Journal of Informetrics, 11(4), 959–975.
  27. [17] Sallu, S., et al. (2025). Research trends and the impact of ChatGPT on educational environments: A mixed-method study. International Journal of Social Sciences and Education Research, 11(1).
  28. [18] Francis, M., Anderson, P., & Thompson, L. (2025). Balancing GenAI benefits with ethical constraints in academic learning. Educational Research Review, 42, 100521.

Most read articles by the same author(s)

Similar Articles

11-20 of 434

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.