Date of this Version
4-1-2026
Document Type
Article
Abstract
Abstract
Purpose In this paper, the gap between the discussion of co-design in the theory and its application in the higher education practice is identified. By contrasting the level of knowledge that the stakeholders possess regarding co-design, the support that the institutions provide them, and their implementation of co-design in practice, it leaves a few general trends, attitudes, and problems.
Design/methodology/approach We were given a structured survey, which measured composite indices of awareness, institutional support, implementation and AI readiness. The study used non-probability purposive sampling technique since it will address the stakeholders who have firsthand experience in the participatory design of the curriculum. The approach provides a descriptive and contextual data in contrast to the prevalence estimates.
Findings Findings show that awareness of co-design is moderate and institutional embedding and implementation is partial. The main issues are the time constraints, power disparities, and ethical issues in relation to the integration of AI. The research also establishes conceptual vagueness of consultation and authentic co-design, institutional inertia, and reserved adoption of AI-supported collaboration.
Originality/value Findings reveal that co-design has a moderately high level of awareness but its adoption and application in institutions is partial. Some of the crucial challenges are time limitations, power disparities, and ethical issues that are associated with AI integration. Conceptual ambiguity between consultation and true co-design, institutional inertia, and the hesitant nature in embracing AI-assisted collaboration are also identified in the study.
