CSU Channel Islands Teaching & Learning Innovations
Fall 2025 Survey Results

AI Perceptions & Usage
at CSUCI

What students, staff, and faculty told us about artificial intelligence

2,238 Students
204 Faculty
242 Staff

About

In Fall 2025, CSU Channel Islands participated in a CSU systemwide AI perception and usage survey designed by researchers at San Diego State University. To date, the survey has drawn more than 100,000 participants across 30+ institutions, including over 92,000 participants in the CSU. At CSUCI, students, faculty, and professional staff all participated, with strong response rates across all groups. This page summarizes key findings from our campus. Results are drawn directly from the AI Survey Dashboard, filtered for CSUCI respondents, and supplemented by analysis from the TLi Blog.


Survey items used a six-point agreement scale (Strongly disagree → Strongly agree). The dashboard does not include qualitative responses. All percentages represent filtered CSUCI-only data.

Read the Blog Posts

What Students Told Us About AI
What Faculty Told Us About AI
What Staff Told Us About AI

Explore the Data

Access the Survey Dashboard
Read the Institutional Report

Dive into the data

Explore the full dataset
Students

Findings from the Student Survey

Approximately 2,100–2,238 CSUCI students responded per question. Click any card to see more detail. View the full student blog post or explore individual questions on the dashboard.

52%

Students regularly use AI in their studies

A slight majority of CSUCI students reported using AI-powered tools regularly in their coursework.

About 52.4% of students agreed (somewhat agree + agree + strongly agree) that they regularly use AI tools in their studies, while 47.6% disagreed. Notably, more than half of the agreement came at the “somewhat agree” level (28.4%), suggesting moderate rather than intensive use.

Access this survey result →

+ Click to expand

64%

Students say professors are NOT teaching AI use

Nearly two-thirds of students disagreed that their professors teach them how to use AI effectively.

64% of students disagreed (strongly disagree 22.2% + disagree 24.5% + somewhat disagree 17.3%) with the statement “My professors teach me how to use AI effectively.” Only 36.1% agreed. This gap between student expectation and faculty practice is one of the most actionable findings in the dataset.

Access this survey result →

+ Click to expand

53%

Students would feel embarrassed using AI for schoolwork

More than half of students indicated they would feel embarrassed if others knew they used AI for academic work.

52.6% of students agreed (somewhat agree 16.1% + agree 14.9% + strongly agree 21.6%) that they would feel embarrassed about AI use in schoolwork. This contrasts with staff and faculty, who report much lower embarrassment—and raises important questions about how academic norms around AI are being communicated to students.

See also: 2024 CSUCI Student AI Survey Brief (PDF)
Access this survey result →

+ Click to expand

63%

Students do not trust AI accuracy

A clear majority of students expressed skepticism about the accuracy and reliability of AI-generated content.

62.8% of students disagreed with the statement that AI produces accurate and reliable results. This healthy skepticism aligns with faculty concerns (67.2% distrust) and suggests students are developing critical evaluation skills around AI outputs.

Access this survey result →

+ Click to expand

74%

Ethical use of AI is a major concern

Nearly three-quarters of students agreed that the ethical use of AI is a major concern for them.

Students share the ethical concerns expressed even more strongly by faculty (88%) and staff (~82%). This broad consensus across all three groups underscores the need for institutional guidance on responsible AI use.

Access this survey result →

+ Click to expand

~70%

Students concerned about AI’s long-term societal effects

A strong majority of students expressed concern about AI’s long-term impact on society.

Approximately 70% of students agreed that they are concerned about AI’s long-term effects on society. While this is high, it is notably lower than staff (85%) and faculty (~88%)—the groups most directly confronting AI’s implications in their professional roles.

Access this survey result →

+ Click to expand

65%

AI has positively affected learning

About two-thirds of students reported a positive impact on their learning experience from AI.

64.6% of students agreed that AI has positively affected their learning. Faculty reported a similar rate (61%) regarding AI’s impact on their teaching, research, and administration. This parallel suggests AI is being experienced as beneficial across roles.

Access this survey result →

+ Click to expand

~80%

Students concerned about AI’s environmental impact

An overwhelming majority of students expressed concern about the environmental footprint of AI technologies.

Approximately 80% of students agreed that they are concerned about AI’s environmental impact, with 42.9% selecting “Strongly agree”—the largest single response category across all student survey items. This level of concern is comparable to staff (76%) and faculty (81%).

Read the full student blog post →

+ Click to expand

51%

Students discuss AI with friends, family, or classmates

About half of students report having conversations about AI in their personal and social circles.

51% of students agreed that they discuss AI topics with friends, family, or classmates. This is notably lower than faculty (79%) and staff (67%), suggesting that peer-to-peer AI conversation among students may benefit from more structured opportunities for dialogue.

Access this survey result →

+ Click to expand

Faculty

Findings from the Faculty Survey

Approximately 195–204 CSUCI faculty responded per question. Click any card to see more detail. Explore individual questions on the dashboard.

88%

Ethical use of AI is a major concern for faculty

This is the defining feature of the faculty dataset—the strongest point of consensus across all groups.

87.7% of faculty indicated that the ethical use of AI is a major concern, including 52.3% who strongly agreed. This is the highest rate of ethical concern across students, staff, and faculty, and underscores the need for sustained institutional dialogue.

Access this survey result →

+ Click to expand

79%

Faculty regularly discuss AI with colleagues

Nearly four in five faculty report having professional discussions about AI on a regular basis.

78.9% of faculty agreed that they regularly discuss AI with colleagues in a professional context. This high rate of peer engagement suggests a faculty body that is actively grappling with AI’s implications for teaching and research.

Access this survey result →

+ Click to expand

63%

Faculty regularly use AI in professional practice

A majority of faculty report incorporating AI tools into their professional work on a regular basis.

62.8% of faculty agreed that they regularly use AI in their professional practice. This suggests that faculty engagement with AI extends beyond classroom policy debates into active use in research, writing, and administrative tasks.

Access this survey result →

+ Click to expand

67%

Faculty do not trust AI’s accuracy

Two-thirds of faculty expressed significant skepticism about the reliability of AI-generated outputs.

67.2% of faculty do not trust AI’s outputs for accuracy and reliability. This critical stance—combined with their active use of AI—paints a picture of a faculty that uses AI tools while maintaining rigorous scrutiny of outputs.

Access this survey result →

+ Click to expand

88%

Faculty concerned about AI’s long-term societal effects

Faculty express deep concern about AI’s broader societal impact, with 50% strongly agreeing.

88% of faculty agreed that they are concerned about AI’s long-term effects on society, with 50% selecting “Strongly agree.” This parallels the staff finding (85%) and exceeds student concern (~70%), underscoring that those closest to research and teaching feel the weight of AI’s societal implications most acutely.

Read the full faculty blog post →

+ Click to expand

81%

Faculty concerned about AI’s environmental impact

A strong majority of faculty expressed concern about the environmental footprint of AI technologies.

81% of faculty agreed that they are concerned about AI’s environmental impact, with 51% selecting “Strongly agree.” This is comparable to staff concern (75.5%), and reflects growing awareness across campus of the energy and resource demands of AI systems.

Read the full faculty blog post →

+ Click to expand

61%

AI has positively affected faculty work

A majority of faculty reported that AI has had a positive impact on their teaching, research, or administration.

61% of faculty agreed that AI has positively affected their teaching, research, or administration. This is comparable to the student rate (65%) but lower than staff (76%), suggesting that faculty may experience a more complex relationship with AI given the additional dimensions of academic integrity and pedagogy.

Read the full faculty blog post →

+ Click to expand

76%

Faculty regularly follow AI news and updates

More than three-quarters of faculty report actively keeping up with developments in AI.

76.4% of faculty agreed that they regularly follow news and updates about AI. This is a striking contrast with students, where 61% disagreed with the same statement. Faculty are far more likely to be actively tracking the AI landscape, which informs their classroom policies and professional practice.

Read the full faculty blog post →

+ Click to expand

81%

Faculty aware of on-campus AI learning opportunities

A strong majority of faculty reported seeing opportunities to learn about AI on campus.

81% of faculty agreed that they have seen opportunities to learn about AI on campus, comparable to the staff rate (84%). This reflects strong institutional investment in professional development around AI for both faculty and staff populations.

Read the full faculty blog post →

+ Click to expand

Staff

Findings from the Staff Survey

Approximately 235–242 CSUCI professional staff responded per question. Click any card to see more detail. View the full staff blog post or explore the dashboard.

84%

Staff see AI learning opportunities on campus

The vast majority of staff reported awareness of professional development opportunities related to AI at CSUCI.

84% of staff agreed that they have seen learning opportunities about AI on campus—the highest rate of awareness of AI professional development of any group surveyed. This reflects strong institutional investment in staff-focused AI education.

Read the full staff blog post →

+ Click to expand

63%

Staff have attended AI workshops

Nearly two-thirds of professional staff have participated in AI-related professional development activities.

63% of staff reported having attended AI workshops or training sessions. This high engagement rate demonstrates that CSUCI staff are proactively building their AI competencies.

Read the full staff blog post →

+ Click to expand

73%

Staff worry about AI’s impact on job security

A strong majority of staff expressed concern about how AI may affect their employment and career stability.

73% of staff agreed that they are concerned about AI’s impact on job security. This concern exists alongside high professional development engagement, suggesting staff want to be prepared but remain anxious about the future of work.

Read the full staff blog post →

+ Click to expand

76%

Staff concerned about AI’s environmental impact

More than three-quarters of staff expressed concern about the environmental footprint of AI technologies.

75.5% of staff agreed that they are concerned about AI’s environmental impact. This was one of the highest areas of consensus in the staff dataset and reflects growing awareness of the energy and resource demands of AI systems.

Read the full staff blog post →

+ Click to expand

85%

Staff concerned about AI’s long-term societal effects

This is the highest rate of consensus on any question in the staff dataset.

85% of staff agreed that they are concerned about AI’s long-term effects on society. This represents the single strongest point of agreement across all staff survey items, and it calls for institutional acknowledgment and structured response.

Read the full staff blog post →

+ Click to expand

~82%

Ethical use of AI is a major concern

Staff share the broad ethical concerns expressed across all three CSUCI populations.

Approximately 82% of staff agreed that the ethical use of AI is a major concern. This places staff between students (~74%) and faculty (88%) on this measure, reflecting a campus-wide consensus that AI ethics require institutional attention.

Read the full staff blog post →

+ Click to expand

68%

Staff regularly use AI in their work

More than two-thirds of staff report using AI-powered tools regularly in their professional duties.

68% of staff agreed that they regularly use AI-powered tools in their work duties. This is the highest regular-use rate across all three groups—higher than faculty (63%) and students (52%)—and reflects a staff community that has embraced AI as a practical workplace tool.

Read the full staff blog post →

+ Click to expand

76%

AI has positively affected staff work experience

More than three-quarters of staff reported that AI has had a positive impact on their professional work.

76% of staff agreed that AI has positively affected their work experience. This is the highest positive-impact rate across all three groups (compared to 65% of students and 61% of faculty), suggesting that staff are finding particularly practical value in AI tools for their day-to-day responsibilities.

Read the full staff blog post →

+ Click to expand

67%

Staff regularly discuss AI with colleagues

Two-thirds of staff report having professional conversations about AI on a regular basis.

67% of staff agreed that they regularly discuss AI topics with colleagues. This is comparable to faculty (79%) and notably higher than students (51%), indicating that professional settings are fostering more sustained dialogue about AI than student peer groups.

Read the full staff blog post →

+ Click to expand

Cross-Group Comparisons

How do students, staff, and faculty compare on shared survey items? These side-by-side comparisons reveal areas of alignment and divergence.

Ethical Use of AI Is a Major Concern

Students
74%
Staff
82%
Faculty
88%

Regularly Use AI

Students
52%
Staff
~55%
Faculty
63%

Do Not Trust AI Accuracy

Students
63%
Staff
~65%
Faculty
67%

Concerned About AI’s Long-Term Societal Effects

Students
~70%
Staff
85%
Faculty
88%

Concerned About AI’s Environmental Impact

Staff
76%
Faculty
81%

AI Positively Affected Their Work / Learning

Students
65%
Faculty
61%

Data source: CSU Systemwide AI Perception & Usage Survey, Fall 2025. Designed and administered by San Diego State University. CSUCI data filtered from the public dashboard.

Sample sizes: Students n ≈ 2,100–2,238 · Staff n ≈ 235–242 · Faculty n ≈ 195–204 per question.