ЦИФРОВА ТРАНСФОРМАЦІЯ УНІВЕРСИТЕТІВ: АГЕНТНІ ТЕХНОЛОГІЇ НА ОСНОВІ ГЕНЕРАТИВНОГО ШТУЧНОГО ІНТЕЛЕКТУ В ОРГАНІЗАЦІЇ НАВЧАЛЬНОГО ПРОЦЕСУ
Анотація
У статті досліджено особливості цифрової трансформації університетів в умовах стрімкого розвитку генеративного штучного інтелекту. Визначено ключові проблеми традиційної організації навчального процесу, зокрема інертність адміністрування, обмежену персоналізацію та перевантаження викладачів. Обґрунтовано доцільність застосування агентних технологій як інструменту інтелектуалізації освітнього середовища. Запропоновано архітектуру мультиагентної системи та типологію ШІ-агентів, що включає агентів-викладачів, тьюторів і адміністративних агентів. Показано їх функціональні можливості в автоматизації процесів, підтримці студентів і аналітиці результатів навчання. Визначено переваги впровадження таких систем для підвищення ефективності освітньої діяльності та якості управлінських рішень.
Посилання
Andersson F. W., Jordahl H., Kärnä A. Ballooning bureaucracy? Stylized facts of growing administration in Swedish higher education. Constitutional Political Economy. 2023. Vol. 35, No. 2. P. 303–326. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10602-023-09408-x
Tze V. M. C., Klassen R. M., Daniels L. M. Patterns of boredom and its relationship with perceived autonomy support and engagement. Contemporary Educational Psychology. 2014. Vol. 39, No. 3. P. 175–187. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2014.05.001
Crespo M., Bertrand D. Faculty workload in a research intensive university: a case study. Montreal: CIRANO, 2013. (Rapports de projets; 2013RP-11). URL: https://cirano.qc.ca/index.php/fr/sommaires/2013RP-11
Lu G. S., Li W. H., Zhang Q. Y., Du P., Lu N. G. An analysis of the types and characteristics of academic work at the university level. Fudan Education Forum. 2010. Vol. 8, No. 6. P. 38–44.
Siconolfi S. F. An analytics-based integrated decision tool for evaluating faculty workloads. International Journal of Management and Decision Making. 2025. P. 452–468. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1504/IJMDM.2025.148353
Spivakovsky O. V., Omelchuk S. A., Kobets V. V., Valko N. V., Malchykova D. S. Institutional policies on artificial intelligence in university learning, teaching and research. Information Technologies and Learning Tools. 2023. Vol. 97, No. 5. P. 181–202. DOI: https://doi.org/10.33407/itlt.v97i5.5395
Ding X. Teaching reform and exploration of data structure course based on artificial intelligence. 2024 International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Digital Libraries (AIDL). Nanjing, 2024. P. 18–21. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/AIDL66202.2024.00011
Gabriska D., Pribilova K. Artificial intelligence in education, issues and potential of use in the teaching process. 2023 21st International Conference on Emerging eLearning Technologies and Applications (ICETA). Stary Smokovec, 2023. P. 141–146. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/ICETA61311.2023.10344286
Karyy O. I., Novakivskyi I., Kis Y., Kulyniak I. Y., Adamovsky A. Model of educational process organizing using artificial intelligence technologies. CEUR Workshop Proceedings. 2023. P. 332–347.
Bruyaka A., Kovalenko V., Marienko M., Semerikov S., Shyshkina M. The current state, threats, and challenges of using generative artificial intelligence to support student learning in higher education institutions. Educological Discourse. 2025. Vol. 50, No. 3. P. 6–18. DOI: https://doi.org/10.28925/2312-5829/2025.3.1
Apata O. E. ChatGPT in higher education: a systematic review of opportunities, perceptions, and challenges // Preprints. 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202507.0567.v1
Moore P. The great history of e-learning platforms. 2026. URL: https://www.didask.com/en/post/la-grande-histoire-des-plateformes-e-learning
eLeaP. Is a learning content management system in the cards for your organization? 2025. URL: https://www.eleapsoftware.com/learning-content-management-system/
Feldstein M. Canvas edges out Blackboard in LMS market share. 2018. URL: https://edscoop.com/canvas-edges-out-blackboard-in-lms-market-share/
Object Management Group. Business Process Model and Notation (BPMN) specification. URL: https://www.bpmn.org/
Andersson, F. W., Jordahl, H., & Kärnä, A. (2023). Ballooning bureaucracy? Stylized facts of growing administration in Swedish higher education. Constitutional Political Economy, 35(2), 303–326. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10602-023-09408-x
Tze, V. M. C., Klassen, R. M., & Daniels, L. M. (2014). Patterns of boredom and its relationship with perceived autonomy support and engagement. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 39(3), 175–187. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2014.05.001
Crespo, M., & Bertrand, D. (2013). Faculty workload in a research intensive university: A case study (Rapports de projets No. 2013RP-11). CIRANO. https://cirano.qc.ca/index.php/fr/sommaires/2013RP-11
Lu, G. S., Li, W. H., Zhang, Q. Y., Du, P., & Lu, N. G. (2010). An analysis of the types and characteristics of academic work at the university level. Fudan Education Forum, 8(6), 38–44.
Siconolfi, S. F. (2025). An analytics-based integrated decision tool for evaluating faculty workloads. International Journal of Management and Decision Making, 452–468. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1504/IJMDM.2025.148353
Spivakovsky, O. V., Omelchuk, S. A., Kobets, V. V., Valko, N. V., & Malchykova, D. S. (2023). Institutional policies on artificial intelligence in university learning, teaching and research. Information Technologies and Learning Tools, 97(5), 181–202. DOI: https://doi.org/10.33407/itlt.v97i5.5395
Ding, X. (2024). Teaching reform and exploration of data structure course based on artificial intelligence. In Proceedings of the 2024 International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Digital Libraries (AIDL) (pp. 18–21). IEEE. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/AIDL66202.2024.00011
Gabriska, D., & Pribilova, K. (2023). Artificial intelligence in education, issues and potential of use in the teaching process. In Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Emerging eLearning Technologies and Applications (ICETA) (pp. 141–146). IEEE. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/ICETA61311.2023.10344286
Karyy, O. I., Novakivskyi, I., Kis, Y., Kulyniak, I. Y., & Adamovsky, A. (2023). Model of educational process organizing using artificial intelligence technologies. In CEUR Workshop Proceedings (pp. 332–347).
Bruyaka, A., Kovalenko, V., Marienko, M., Semerikov, S., & Shyshkina, M. (2025). The current state, threats, and challenges of using generative artificial intelligence to support student learning in higher education institutions. Educological Discourse, 50(3), 6–18. DOI: https://doi.org/10.28925/2312-5829/2025.3.1
Apata, O. E. (2025). ChatGPT in higher education: A systematic review of opportunities, perceptions, and challenges. Preprints. DOI: https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202507.0567.v1
Moore, P. (2026, January 14). The great history of e-learning platforms. Didask. Available at: https://www.didask.com/en/post/la-grande-histoire-des-plateformes-e-learning
eLeaP. (2025, November 10). Is a learning content management system in the cards for your organization? Available at: https://www.eleapsoftware.com/learning-content-management-system/
Feldstein, M. (2018, July 11). Canvas edges out Blackboard in LMS market share. EdScoop. Available at: https://edscoop.com/canvas-edges-out-blackboard-in-lms-market-share/
Object Management Group. (n.d.). Business Process Model and Notation (BPMN) specification. Available at: https://www.bpmn.org/
