Ahl al-Bayt (as) Teachings

Ahl al-Bayt (as) Teachings

A Conceptual Framework for Elucidating the Epistemological Foundations of Academic Readiness and Academic Integrity for the Responsible Use of Artificial Intelligence: Emphasizing the Teachings of Nahj al-Balaghah

Document Type : Original Article

Authors
1 M.A. Student of Educational Psychology, Department of Educational Psychology, Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, Islamic Azad University, Science and Research Branch, Tehran, Iran .
2 Assistant Professor, Faculty Member, Imam Mobin Research Center, Qom, Iran.
3 Assistant Professor, Department of Educational Psychology, Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, Islamic Azad University, Science and Research Branch, Tehran, Iran.
Abstract
The rapid advancement of artificial intelligence (AI), particularly generative AI, has created new opportunities and challenges for higher education. The responsible use of this technology extends beyond the mere ability to operate intelligent tools; it also requires academic readiness and adherence to the principles of academic integrity. Despite the significance of these two constructs, the existing literature has generally examined them within separate theoretical frameworks, while the potential of Islamic epistemological sources to deepen their theoretical foundations has received limited attention. Accordingly, the present study aimed to develop a conceptual framework for explaining the epistemological, educational, and ethical foundations of academic readiness and academic integrity in the context of AI, with particular emphasis on the teachings of Nahj al-Balaghah. This study employed a theoretical review approach using document analysis, concept analysis, and theoretical synthesis. First, the literature on academic readiness, academic integrity, and the responsible use of AI in higher education was reviewed to identify their principal components. Subsequently, selected concepts from Nahj al-Balaghah were examined through concept analysis to explore their potential for explaining the theoretical foundations of the research constructs. The objective was not to establish direct conceptual equivalence between classical concepts and contemporary constructs, but rather to identify the capacity of Nahj al-Balaghah to enrich the study's theoretical framework. The findings indicated that concepts such as reason (ʿaql), wisdom (ḥikmah), the unity of knowledge and action, self-accountability, truthfulness, trustworthiness, justice, and responsibility can serve as foundational components for reinterpreting academic readiness and academic integrity in the age of AI. Based on the theoretical synthesis, a conceptual framework was developed in which academic readiness provides the cognitive, psychological, and technological capacities required for informed engagement with AI, whereas academic integrity determines the ethical orientation and sense of responsibility guiding such engagement. By integrating contemporary higher education literature with the epistemological resources of Nahj al-Balaghah, this study proposes an integrative framework for a deeper understanding of the foundations of academic readiness and academic integrity amid technological transformation. The proposed framework may provide a basis for future empirical research, the design of educational programs, and the development of institutional policies regarding the responsible use of AI in higher education.
Keywords
Subjects

1.    Bowen, Glenn A. (2009). “Document Analysis as a Qualitative Research Method.” Qualitative Research Journal, Vol. 9, No. 2, pp. 27–40.
2.    Dashti, Moḥammad. (2009). Nahj al-Balaghah. Translated by Moḥammad Dashti. Qom: Amir al-Mu’minin Cultural and Research Institute.
3.    Davis, Fred D. (1989). “Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology.” MIS Quarterly, Vol. 13, No. 3, pp. 319–340.
4.    Fayz al-Islam, Ali Naqi. (2001). Translation and Commentary on Nahj al-Balaghah. Tehran: Faqih Publications.
5.    Grant, Maria J.; Booth, Andrew. (2009). “A Typology of Reviews: An Analysis of 14 Review Types and Associated Methodologies.” Health Information & Libraries Journal, Vol. 26, No. 2, pp. 91–108.
6.    International Center for Academic Integrity. (2021). The Fundamental Values of Academic Integrity. 3rd ed. Clemson: International Center for Academic Integrity.
7.    Jabareen, Yosef. (2009). “Building a Conceptual Framework: Philosophy, Definitions, and Procedure.” International Journal of Qualitative Methods, Vol. 8, No. 4, pp. 49–62.
8.    Kasneci, Enkelejda; Sessler, Konstantin; Küchemann, Sebastian; Bannert, Maria; Dementieva, Daryna; Fischer, Frank; Gasser, Urs; Groh, Georg; Günnemann, Stephan; Hüllermeier, Eyke; Krusche, Stephan; Kutyniok, Gitta; Michaeli, Tom; Nerdel, C.; Pfeffer, J.; Poquet, Oleksandra; Sailer, Michael; Schmidt, Andreas; Seidel, Tina; Stadler, Matthias; Weller, Jochen; Kuhn, Jochen; Kasneci, Gjergji. (2023). “ChatGPT for Good? On Opportunities and Challenges of Large Language Models for Education.” Learning and Individual Differences, Vol. 103, Article 102274.
9.    Pintrich, Paul R. (2000). “The Role of Goal Orientation in Self-Regulated Learning.” In M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of Self-Regulation, pp. 451–502. San Diego: Academic Press.
10.    Rest, James R. (1986). Moral Development: Advances in Research and Theory. New York: Praeger.
11.    Rodgers, Beth L. (2000). “Concept Analysis: An Evolutionary View.” In B. L. Rodgers & K. A. Knafl (Eds.), Concept Development in Nursing: Foundations, Techniques, and Applications. 2nd ed., pp. 77–102. Philadelphia: Saunders.
12.    Snyder, Hannah. (2019). “Literature Review as a Research Methodology: An Overview and Guidelines.” Journal of Business Research, Vol. 104, pp. 333–339.
13.    UNESCO. (2023). Guidance for Generative AI in Education and Research. Paris: UNESCO.
14.    Vuorikari, Riina; Kluzer, Stefano; Punie, Yves. (2022). DigComp 2.2: The Digital Competence Framework for Citizens. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.
15.    Walker, Lorraine O.; Avant, Kay C. (2019). Strategies for Theory Construction in Nursing. 6th ed. Pearson.
16.    Zimmerman, Barry J. (2000). “Attaining Self-Regulation: A Social Cognitive Perspective.” In M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of Self-Regulation, pp. 13–39. San Diego: Academic Press.
Volume 4, Issue 2
Summer 2026
Pages 47-66

  • Receive Date 05 August 2026
  • Revise Date 12 August 2026
  • Accept Date 28 September 2026
  • First Publish Date 28 September 2026
  • Publish Date 23 August 2026