Personalization Imperative: Unpacking Student-AI Relationships Through a Mixed-Methods Lens in Indonesian Higher Education

Authors

  • Idha Novianti
  • Elang Krisnadi
  • Thesa Kandaga
  • Ranak Lince
  • Husnaeni Husnaeni
  • Nurmawati Nurmawati
  • Sudirman Sudirman

Keywords:

artificial intelligence; personalization; student satisfaction; technology acceptance; higher education; mixed methods

Abstract

While extensive research has examined the technical effectiveness of artificial intelligence (AI) in improving learning outcomes, limited attention has been paid to students’ perspectives as primary users, particularly within culturally specific contexts such as developing countries. Moreover, the mechanisms through which AI influences student satisfaction and sustained adoption remain insufficiently theorized, especially regarding the interplay between effectiveness and personalization. This study investigated AI effectiveness in improving students’ learning outcomes, its influence on students’ personalization, and challenges and experiences with AI as their learning companion. Employing a sequential exploratory mixed-methods design, 85 mathematics education students were surveyed at Universitas Terbuka, Indonesia, followed by qualitative thematic analysis of open-ended responses. The multiple regression analysis revealed an intriguing paradox, indicating that AI personalization is the only significant predictor of both satisfaction and intention to continue using AI tools (? = 0.450, p < 0.05), explaining 32.8% of variance. Despite showing a significant positive correlation in the bivariate analysis, AI effectiveness did not significantly predict satisfaction and continued intention. Concerns exhibited no meaningful influence on adoption intentions. Analysis of qualitative data uncovered three superordinate themes: (1) ambivalent experiences characterized by operational efficiency yet informational inaccuracy, with 73.5% of students developing adaptive verification strategies; (2) dual influences on collaboration, where AI facilitated communication (25.9%) yet inhibited peer interaction (35.3%); and (3) systemic challenges spanning epistemological (32.9%), pedagogical (29.4%), and social (21.2%) dimensions. The findings imply that adaptive personalization is essential for converting the general effectiveness of AI into meaningful, context-specific value for learners, emphasizing that educational technologies must prioritize personalization to enhance engagement and support sustainable adoption in diverse learning settings. This study contributes to technology adoption theory by demonstrating that personalization acts as a key mediator, challenging traditional technology acceptance model assumptions. The study offers empirical insights into the role of personalized AI in Indonesian higher education, informing the design of more culturally responsive and effective educational technologies.

https://doi.org/10.26803/ijlter.25.1.35

References

Abbas, M., Jam, F. A., & Khan, T. I. (2024). Is it harmful or helpful? Examining the causes and consequences of generative AI usage among university students. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 21(1), Article 10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-024-00444-7

Aiumtrakul, N., Thongprayoon, C., Suppadungsuk, S., Krisanapan, P., Miao, J., Qureshi, F., & Cheungpasitporn, W. (2023). Navigating the landscape of personalized medicine: The relevance of ChatGPT, BingChat, and Bard AI in nephrology literature searches. Journal of Personalized Medicine, 13(10), Article 1457. https://doi.org/10.3390/jpm13101457

Alam, A. (2023). Harnessing the power of AI to create intelligent tutoring systems for enhanced classroom experience and improved learning outcomes. In G. Rajakumar, K. L. Du, & Á. Rocha (Eds.), Lecture notes on data engineering and communications technologies (pp. 571–591). Springer Science and Business Media Deutschland GmbH. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-1767-9_42

Al-Daihani, S. M. (2016). Students’ adoption of Twitter as an information source: An exploratory study using the technology acceptance model. Malaysian Journal of Library & Information Science, 21(3), 57–69. https://doi.org/10.22452/mjlis.vol21no3.4

Ali, M., & Abdel-Haq, M. K. (2021). Bibliographical analysis of artificial intelligence learning in higher education. In M. Ali & T. Wood-Harper (Eds.), Fostering communication and learning with underutilized technologies in higher education (pp. 36–52). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-7998-4846-2.ch003

Almheiri, A. S. B., Albastaki, H., & Alrashdan, H. (2025). AI-based tutoring systems in education. In B. Edwards, H. Abuhassna, D. Olugbade, O. Ojo, & W. Jaafar Wan Yahaya (Eds.), Generators, bots, and tutors: Creative approaches to human-AI synergy in classroom instruction (pp. 185–210). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/979-8-3373-0847-0.ch007

Almusfar, L. A. (2024). Optimizing the e-learning experience: The importance of personalization and essential design elements. e-Learning and Digital Media. https://doi.org/10.1177/20427530241239425

Alyoussef, I. Y., Drwish, A. M., Albakheet, F. A., Alhajhoj, R. H., & Al-Mousa, A. A. (2025). AI adoption for collaboration: Factors influencing inclusive learning adoption in higher education. IEEE Access, 13, 81690–81713. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2025.3567656

Ansari, S. R., & Qamari, I. N. (2025). Artificial intelligence and students’ cognitive learning outcomes with bibliometric and content analysis for future research agenda. Discover Education, 4, Article 441. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44217-025-00865-0

Arriazu, R. (2025). The daunting challenge of artificial intelligence in education: A systematic literature review. Journal of e-Learning and Knowledge Society, 21(1), 236?244. https://doi.org/10.20368/1971-8829/1135992

Awad, P., & Oueida, S. (2024). The potential impact of artificial intelligence on education: Opportunities and challenges. In K. Arai (Ed.), Future of Information and Communication Conference (pp. 566–575). Springer Nature Switzerland. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-53960-2_26

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa

Bravo, E., Bayram, D., van der Veen, J. T., & Reymen, I. (2025). Students’ learning gains in extracurricular challenge-based learning teams. European Journal of Engineering Education, 50(2), 342–359. https://doi.org/10.1080/03043797.2024.2386108

Chan, C. K. Y., & Hu, W. (2023). Students’ voices on generative AI: Perceptions, benefits, and challenges in higher education. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 20(1), Article 43. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-023-00411?8

Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approach (5th ed.). SAGE Publications.

Do?an, M., Celik, A., & Arslan, H. (2025). AI in higher education: Risks and opportunities from the academician perspective. European Journal of Education, 60(1), e12863. https://doi.org/10.1111/ejed.12863

Duarte, A., Andrade, J. G., & Dias, P. (2025). Digital tools and platforms for effective and personalized learning. IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/979-8-3373-6013-3

Gasaymeh, A., Abu Qbeita, A. A., AlMohtadi, R., & Beirat, M. (2025). Exploring education students’ use of ChatGPT for academic and personal purposes: Insights from a developing country context. Frontiers in Education, 10, Article 1580310. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2025.1580310

Isnawan, M. G., Belbase, S., & Yanuarto, W. N. (2024). Implementation of a hybrid mathematics module to minimize students’ learning obstacles when interpreting fractions. International Journal of Didactic Mathematics in Distance Education, 1(2), 83–101. https://doi.org/10.33830/ijdmde.v1i2.9555

Jahani, M., Baruah, B., & Ward, A. (2024). Exploring ChatGPT utilization among master’s students in higher education [Conference session]. 2024 21st International Conference on Information Technology Based Higher Education and Training (ITHET), 2024, November 6–8, Paris, France. IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ITHET61869.2024.10837601

Jain, A., Nimonkar, P., & Jadhav, P. (2025). Citation integrity in the age of AI: Evaluating the risks of reference hallucination in maxillofacial literature. Journal of Cranio-Maxillofacial Surgery, 53(10), 1871–1872. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcms.2025.08.004

Joel, R., Lakshmi, N., Shanthakumar, P., & Siva, A. (2024). Evaluating the impact of AI tools on teaching effectiveness and student outcomes. In F. Moreira & R. Teles (Eds.), Improving student assessment with emerging AI tools (pp. 273–300). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/979-8-3693-6170-2.ch010

Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (2009). An educational psychology success story: Social interdependence theory and cooperative learning. Educational Researcher, 38(5), 365–379. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X09339057

Kang, X., Zhang, H., Li, T., Shan, Y., & Nie, Y. (2025). Factors affecting the college students’ continuous usage behavior of artificial intelligence technology: From the perspective of human-computer collaborative learning [Conference session]. 2025 7th International Conference on Computer Science and Technologies in Education (CSTE), 2025, April 18–20, Wuhan, China. IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/CSTE64638.2025.11092071

Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511815355

Lynch, M. P. (2001). The nature of truth: Classic and contemporary perspectives. MIT Press.

Martínez, C. M., Roger-Monzo, V., & Sirvent, F. C. (2025). IA generativa y pensamiento crítico en la educación universitaria a distancia: Desafíos y oportunidades [Generative AI and critical thinking in online higher education: Challenges and opportunities]. RIED-Revista Iberoamericana de Educación a Distancia, 28(2), 233-273. https://doi.org/10.5944/ried.28.2.43556

Monike, R. S., Sudirman, S., Kandaga, T., & Rodríguez-Nieto, C. A. (2025). Effectiveness of ChatGPT-integrated discovery learning on mathematical literacy in three-variable linear equation systems: A quasi-experimental study. International Journal of Didactic Mathematics in Distance Education, 3(1), 64–82. https://doi.org/10.33830/ijdmde.v3i1.13157

Masten, A. S. (2014). Global perspectives on resilience in children and youth. Child Development, 85(1), 6–20. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12205

Morgado, E., Leonido, L., Pereira, A., & Gouveia, L. B. (2025). Technology-mediated education: Impact of AI on the main distance learning modalities. Educational Process International Journal, 16(1), e2025211. https://doi.org/10.22521/edupij.2025.16.211

Ningsih, A. G. (2025). Exploring the impact of adaptive real-time quiz platforms with differentiated learning features on student engagement and learning outcomes: A mixed-methods approach. International Journal of Information and Education Technology, 15(6), 1261–1276. https://doi.org/10.18178/ijiet.2025.15.6.2329

Noviyanti, M., Sudirman, S., & Rodríguez-Nieto, C. A. (2025). Transformation of mathematical knowledge for teaching non-euclidean geometry concept through e-learning based on the theory of didactic situations using a multiphase mixed method. Jurnal Ilmiah Ilmu Terapan Universitas Jambi, 9(2), 578-597. https://doi.org/10.22437/jiituj.v9i2.42976

Noviyanti, M. (2019). Teachers’ belief in mathematics teaching: A case study of early childhood education teachers. In Journal of Physics: Conference Series (Vol. 1315, No. 1, p. 012010). IOP Publishing.

Poell, T., Maas, L., Balk, M., & van Haastrecht, M. (2025). SchrijfBlik: Safeguarding the validity of writing assessment in the age of AI. In A. I. Cristea, E. Walker, Y. Lu, O. C. Santos, & S. Isotani (Eds.), Artificial intelligence in education. Posters and late breaking results, workshops and tutorials, industry and innovation tracks, practitioners, Doctoral Consortium, Blue Sky, and WideAIED. AIED 2025 (Communications in Computer and Information Science, vol. 2590, pp. 71–80). Springer Nature. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-99261-2_6

Popkov, A. A., & Barrett, T. S. (2024). AI vs academia: Experimental study on AI text detectors’ accuracy in behavioral health academic writing. Accountability in Research, 32(7), 1072–1088. https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2024.2331757

Ravšelj, D., Kerži?, D., Tomaževi?, N., Umek, L., Brezovar, N., Iahad, N. A., Duarte, A., Silva, P., Permozer, R., Agasisti, T., Al-Fadhli, N., De-Miguel, E., Psaromiligkos, Y., & Aristovnik, A. (2025). Higher education students’ perceptions of ChatGPT: A global study of early reactions. PLoS ONE, 20(2), e0315011. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0315011

Reihanian, I., Hou, Y., Chen, Y., & Zheng, Y. (2025). A review of generative AI in computer science education: Challenges and opportunities in accuracy, authenticity, and assessment. In H. R. Arabnia, L. Deligiannidis, F. Shenavarmasouleh, S. Amirian, & F. Ghareh Mohammadi (Eds.), Computational science and computational intelligence (CSCI 2024) (Communications in Computer and Information Science, Vol. 2504). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-94943-2_11

Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2020). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation from a self-determination theory perspective: Definitions, theory, practices, and future directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 61, Article 101860. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2020.101860

Salih, S., Husain, O., Hamdan, M., Abdelsalam, S., Elshafie, H., & Motwakel, A. (2025). Transforming education with AI: A systematic review of ChatGPT’s role in learning, academic practices, and institutional adoption. Results in Engineering, 25, Article 103837. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rineng.2024.103837

Seemiller, C., & Grace, M. (2016). Generation Z goes to college. Jossey-Bass.

Sholeh, M. I. (2025). Educational transformation through artificial intelligence: Implementation of AI tools in the teaching and learning process. In V. Pham, A. Lian, A. Lian, & S. Barros (Eds.), Implementing AI tools for language teaching and learning (pp. 25–40). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/979-8-3693-7260-9.ch002

Sridana, N., Alsulami, N. M., Isnawan, M. G., & Sukarma, I. K. (2025). Problem-solving based epistemic learning pattern: Optimizing mathematical representation ability of prospective teachers and pharmacists. Educational Process: International Journal, 14, e2025021. https://doi.org/10.22521/edupij.2025.14.21

Sudirman, S., Rodríguez-Nieto, C. A., Prasetyo Adi, P. D., Muslim, A. B., Faizah, S., Dwi Susandi, A., & SaDijah, C. (2025). Contextualising AR digital module instruction as artifacts in 3D geometry: A didactical tetrahedron action research. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 56(8), 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2025.2530957

Sukarma, I. K., Isnawan, M. G., & Alsulami, N. M. (2024). Research on nonroutine problems: A hybrid didactical design for overcoming student learning obstacles. Human Behavior and Emerging Technologies, 2024(1), Article 5552365. https://doi.org/10.1155/2024/5552365

Sweller, J., van Merriënboer, J. J. G., & Paas, F. (2019). Cognitive architecture and instructional design: 20 years later. Educational Psychology Review, 31(2), 261–292. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-019-09465-5

Wei, X., & Wei, X. (2025). Deep integration of generative artificial intelligence and higher education: Contents, potential risks, and solutions. In K. Zhang, X. Song, M. S. Obaidat, A. Bilal, J. Hu, & Z. Lu (Eds.), 6th International Conference on Computer Science and Educational Informatization, CSEI 2024 (pp. 186–203). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-96-3738-6_15

Wertsch, J. V. (1991). Voices of the mind: A sociocultural approach to mediated action. Harvard University Press.

Yadav, S. (2024). Reimagining education with advanced technologies. In A. Mutawa (Ed.), Impacts of generative AI on the future of research and education (pp. 1–26). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/979-8-3693-0884-4.ch001

Downloads

Published

2026-01-30

How to Cite

Novianti, I. ., Krisnadi, . E. ., Kandaga, T. ., Lince, R., Husnaeni, H., Nurmawati, N., & Sudirman, . S. (2026). Personalization Imperative: Unpacking Student-AI Relationships Through a Mixed-Methods Lens in Indonesian Higher Education. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 25(1), 750–778. Retrieved from http://www.ijlter.myres.net/index.php/ijlter/article/view/2685

Issue

Vol. 25 No. 1 (2026): January 2026

Section

Articles

License

Copyright (c) 2026 Idha Novianti, Elang Krisnadi, Thesa Kandaga, Ranak Lince, Husnaeni Husnaeni, Nurmawati Nurmawati, Sudirman Sudirman

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

All articles published by IJLTER are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial No-Derivatives 4.0 International License (CCBY-NC-ND4.0).