Suitability Assessments in Higher Education
Pitfalls with the Use of Artificial Intelligence in Extended Mentoring
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15845/ntvp.v10i2.4382Keywords:
mentoring, critical thinking, reflection, professional development, advanced suitability assessment, artificial intelligenceAbstract
Advanced suitability assessments of students in higher education in Norway, consider if a student poses a potential risk to vulnerable groups in future professional practice. The purpose of this study is to examine how mentors across disciplines experience students' use of artificial intelligence (AI) in extended mentoring in advanced suitability assessments, and how this impacts mentoring practices. Data were collected through in-depth interviews with four mentors and their reflection notes following mentoring sessions. Thematic analysis revealed that mentors face pitfalls when students use AI to enhance personal and professional development. It becomes difficult to uncover the students' critical reflection and self-awareness, particularly in empathy and care. Findings indicate that students undergoing advanced suitability assessments may lack key competences required for professional practice, such as communication and contextual understanding. The mentees’ use of AI as a shortcut rather than as a tool has various impacts on extended mentoring practices, including reduced learning depth, reduced problem-solving skills, increased dependency on technology, and raised ethical concerns.
References
Biesta, G.J.J. (2017). The future of teacher education: Evidence, competence, or wisdom? In: M.A. Peters, B. Cowie & I. Menter (Eds.), A companion to research in teacher education, pp. 435- 453. Springer.
Bäcklund, J., Sädbom, R. F., Manderstedt, L., & Anderstrom, H. (2024). We are mentoring more often: experiences of being a mentor in a training school project, Education Inquiry, 15(2), pp. 203-226. https://doi.org/10.1080/20004508.2022.2086736
Cotton, D. R. E., Cotton, P. A., & Shipway, J. R. (2024). Chatting and cheating: Ensuring academic integrity in the era of ChatGPT. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 61(2), pp. 228–239. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2023.2190148
Diakopoulos, N. (2016). Accountability in algorithmic decision making. Communications of the ACM, 59(2), pp. 56-62. https://doi.org/10.1145/2844110
Dikilitaş, K., Furenes Klippen, M. I., & Keles, S. (2024). A Systematic Rapid Review of Empirical Research on Students’ Use of ChatGPT in Higher Education. Nordic Journal of Systematic Reviews in Education, 2(1). https://doi.org/10.23865/njsre.v2.6227
Fulgencio, S. – V. (2024). Developing Effective Educational Chatbots with GPT: Insights from a Pilot Study in a University Subject, Trends High. Educ. 2024, 3(1), pp. 155-168. https://doi.org/10.3390/higheredu3010009
Hvalby, M. (2022). “I do not Want to Shatter Their Dreams of Becoming Teachers.” Mentors’ use of Professional Judgement in Suitability Assessments. In K. Smith (Ed.), Inquiry as a Bridge in Teaching and Teacher Education. Fagbokforlaget. pp.171-189. https://doi.org/10.55669/oa120410
Kildahl, K. (2020). Skikket for yrket? Skikkethetsvurdering i profesjonsutdanninger. Universitetsforlaget.
Köbis, L. & Mehner, C. (2021). Ethical Questions Raised by AI-Supported Mentoring in Higher Education, Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence, Vol. 4, https://doi.org/10.3389/frai.2021.624050
Leavy, P. (2014). The Oxford Handbook of Qualitativ Education: A user’s guide. (3rd ed.), Thousand Oaks, Sage Publications.
Ministry of Education and Research. (2023). Regulations relating to suitability assessment in higher education. https://lovdata.no/dokument/SF/forskrift/2024-06-28-1392/KAPITTEL_7#KAPITTEL_7
Moser, A. & Korstjens, I. (2018). Series: Practical guidance to qualitative research. Part 3: Sampling, data collection and analysis. European Journal of General Practice, 24(1), pp. 9-18.
Natterøy, C. S., Tveit, B., & Raustøl, A. (2023). Nurse mentors’ experiences with suitability assessments in clinical placement: A qualitative study, Nurse Education in Practice, Volume 72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nepr.2023.103755
Neumann, M., Rauschenberger, M., & Schon, E. M. (2023). “We need to talk about ChatGPT”: The future of AI and higher education. In Proceedings – 2023 IEEE/ACM 5th International Workshop on Software Engineering Education for the Next Generation, SEENG 2023. https://doi.org/10.25968/opus-2467
Noble, S. U. (2018). Algorithms of Oppression: How Search Engines Reinforce Racism. NYU Press.
Norwegian Agency for Quality Assurance in Education. (2021). Kvalitetsområder for studieprogram i høyere utdanning. NOKUT. https://www.nokut.no/hogare-utdanning/kvalitetsomrader-for-studieprogram-i-hoyere-utdanning/
Norwegian Directorate for Higher Education and Skills (2024). Guidelines related to regulations for suitability assessments in higher education. https://hkdir.no/dokumenter/les-dokumentet/veileder-til-forskrift-til-lov-om-universiteter-og-hoyskoler-universitets-og-hoyskoleforskriften-kapittel-7-skikkethetsvurderinger/narmere-om-forskriften
Olsen, L. B., Grøndahl, V. A. & Femdal, I. (2023). Vurdering av studenters skikkethet for yrket – en kartleggingsstudie i profesjonsutdanningene [Assessing students’ suitability for the profession], Uniped 46(2), pp. 97-114. https://doi.org/10.18261/uniped.46.2.4
Pettersen, R. C. & Løkke, J. A. (2019). Veiledning i praksis – grunnleggende ferdigheter. Universitetsforlaget.
Saldaña, J. (2014). The coding manual for qualitative researchers (2nd ed.). SAGE Publications.
Shanks, R., Attard Tonna, M., Krøjgaard, F., Paaske, K., Robson, D., & Bjerkholt, E. (2020). A comparative study of mentoring for new teachers. Professional Development in Education, 48(5), pp. 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2020.1744684
Smith, K. (2015). Mentoring- a profession within a profession. In H. Tillema, G. van Westhuisen, & K. Smith (Eds.), Mentoring for learning - climbing the mountain (pp. 283–298). Sense publishers.
Sullivan, M., Kelly, A., & McLaughlan, P. (2023). ChatGPT in higher education: Considerations for academic integrity and student learning. Journal of Applied Learning and Teaching, 6(1). https://doi.org/10.37074/jalt.2023.6.1.17
Søndenå, K. (2004). Kraftfull refleksjon i lærerutdanninga [Powerful reflection in teacher education]. Abstrakt.
The National Committee for Research Ethics in the Social Sciences and the Humanities (NESH). (2023). Forskningsetiske retningslinjer for samfunnsvitenskap, humaniora, juss og teologi. https://www.forskningsetikk.no/retningslinjer/hum-sam/forskningsetiske-retningslinjer-for-samfunnsvitenskap-og-humaniora/
Tomaszewski, L. E., Zarestky, J., & Gonzalez, E. (2020). Planning Qualitative Research: Design and Decision Making for New Researchers. International journal of qualitative methods, 19. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406920967174
Tveitnes, M. S. & Hvalby, M. (2023). Mentoring Novice Teachers in a Norwegian Context of Inclusive Education. Teachers and Teaching, 30(1), 71–84. https://doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2023.2225442
Ulla, B. & Larsen, A. S. (2021). Humble Hopes in Mentorship and Education: Thinking with Temporality, Educ. Sci., 11(10), 635; https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11100635
Ødegard, E., Bjerkholt, E., Sondena, K. & Hjardemaal, F. (2014). Hvordan kan veiledningssamtaler åpne for kritisk tenkning? [How can mentoring conversations facilitate critical thinking]. Uniped, 37(4). https://doi.org/10.3402/uniped.v37.23814
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Mette Hvalby
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
