This article examines how artificial intelligence is transforming instructor-student communication and student evaluation in higher education. By comparing traditional and AI-mediated communication practices, the study synthesizes current literature on opportunities, challenges, and ethical considerations. The analysis highlights the need for digital literacy, emotionally intelligent AI tools, and balanced pedagogical strategies. Practical and theoretical propositions are provided to guide educators in leveraging AI while preserving human-centered teaching values.
AgostiniD.PicassoF. (2024). Large language models for sustainable assessment and feedback in higher education. Intelligenza Artificiale, 18(1), 121-138. https://doi.org/10.3233/IA-240033
2.
Al-MughairiH.BhaskarP. (2024). Exploring the factors affecting the adoption AI techniques in higher education: Insights from teachers’ perspectives on ChatGPT. Journal of Research in Innovative Teaching and Learning. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1108/JRIT-09-2023-0129
3.
AlhajeriS.AlTameemyF. A. (2023). Determinants of effective instructors in higher education institutions: A cross-cultural comparison. International Journal of Educational Management, 37(6-7), 1571-1585. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEM-12-2022-0531
4.
AliI.WarraichN. F.ButtK. (2024). Acceptance and use of artificial intelligence and AI-based applications in education: A meta-analysis and future direction. Information Development. https://doi.org/10.1177/02666669241257206
5.
AllenJ. (2004). The impact of student learning outcomes assessment on technical and professional communication programs. Technical Communication Quarterly, 13(1), 93-108. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15427625tcq1301_9
6.
BarajasM.GannawayG. J. (2007). Implementing E-learning in the traditional higher education institutions. Higher Education in Europe, 32(2-3), 111-119. https://doi.org/10.1080/03797720701840609
7.
BattaA. (2024). Transforming higher education through generative AI: Opportunity and challenges. Paradigm: A Management Research Journal, 28(2), 241-243. https://doi.org/10.1177/09718907241286221
8.
BauerE.SailerM.NiklasF.GreiffS.Sarbu-RothschingS.ZottmannJ. M.KiesewetterJ.StadlerM.FischerM. R.SeidelT.UrhahneD.SailerM.FischerF. (2025). AI-based adaptive feedback in simulations for teacher education: An experimental replication in the field. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 41(1), e13123. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.13123
9.
BreakstoneJ.McGrewS.SmithM.OrtegaT.WineburgS. (2018). Why we need a new approach to teaching digital literacy. Phi Delta Kappan, 99(6), 27–32. https://doi.org/10.1177/0031721718762419
10.
CarmeliA.BruellerD.DuttonJ. E. (2008). Learning behaviours in the workplace: The role of high-quality interpersonal relationships and psychological safety. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 26(1), 81-98. https://doi.org/10.1002/sres.932
11.
CatanoV. M.HarveyS. (2011). Student perception of teaching effectiveness: Development and validation of the Evaluation of Teaching Competencies Scale (ETCS). Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 36(6), 701-717. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2010.484879
12.
ChenX.XieH.QinS. J.WangF. L.HouY. (2025). Artificial intelligence-supported student engagement research: Text mining and systematic analysis. European Journal of Education, 60(1), e70008. https://doi.org/10.1111/ejed.70008
13.
ConstantinidesE.StagnoM. C. Z. (2011). Potential of the social media as instruments of higher education marketing: A segmentation study. Journal of Marketing for Higher Education, 21(1), 7-24. https://doi.org/10.1080/08841241.2011.573593
DemirM.BurtonS.DunbarN. (2019). Professor–student rapport and perceived autonomy support as predictors of course and student outcomes. Teaching of Psychology, 46(1), 22-33. https://doi.org/10.1177/0098628318816132
16.
DeshpandeA. S.WebbS. C.MarksE. (1970). Student perceptions of engineering instructor behaviors and their relationships to the evaluation of instructors and courses. American Educational Research Journal, 7(3), 289-305.
17.
DoğanM.CelikA.ArslanH. (2025). AI in higher education: Risks and opportunities from the academician perspective. European Journal of Education, 60(1), e12863. https://doi.org/10.1111/ejed.12863
18.
EfuS. I. (2019). Exams as learning tools: A comparison of traditional and collaborative assessment in higher education. College Teaching, 67(1), 73-83. https://doi.org/10.1080/87567555.2018.1531282
19.
ErdmannA.Toro-DupouyL. (2025). The influence of the institutional environment on AI adoption in universities: Identifying value drivers and necessary conditions. European Journal of Innovation Management. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJIM-04-2024-0407
20.
EsplugasM. (2023). The use of artificial intelligence (AI) to enhance academic communication, education and research: A balanced approach. Journal of Hand Surgery: European Volume, 48(8), 819-822. https://doi.org/10.1177/17531934231185746
21.
FarhadiB.WintonS. (2024). E-learning for the public good? The policy trajectory of online education in Ontario, Canada. Educational Policy, 38(7), 1676-1712. https://doi.org/10.1177/08959048241267953
22.
FrymierA. B.HouserM. L. (2000). The teacher-student relationship as an interpersonal relationship. Communication Education, 49(3), 207-219. https://doi.org/10.1080/03634520009379209
23.
HoodaM.RanaC.DahiyaO.RizwanA.HossainM. S. (2022). Artificial intelligence for assessment and feedback to enhance student success in higher education. Mathematical Problems in Engineering, 2022, 1-19. https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/5215722
24.
JiangH.IslamA. Y. M. A.GuX.SpectorJ. M.ChenS. (2022). Technology-enabled E-learning platforms in Chinese higher education during the pandemic age of COVID-19. SAGE Open, 12(2). https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440221095085
25.
KaranB.AngadiG. R. (2023). Potential risks of artificial intelligence integration into school education: A systematic review. Bulletin of Science, Technology and Society, 43(3-4), 67-85). https://doi.org/10.1177/02704676231224705
26.
KebritchiM.LipschuetzA.SantiagueL. (2017). Issues and challenges for teaching successful online courses in higher education. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 46(1), 4-29. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047239516661713
27.
KiteM. E.SubediP. C.Bryant-LeesK. B. (2015). Students’ perceptions of the teaching evaluation process. Teaching of Psychology, 42(4), 307-314. https://doi.org/10.1177/0098628315603062
28.
KoltayT. (2011). The media and the literacies: Media literacy, information literacy, digital literacy. Media, Culture and Society, 33(2), 211-221. https://doi.org/10.1177/0163443710393382
29.
KramerM. W.PierP. M. (1999). Students’ perceptions of effective and ineffective communication by college teachers. Southern Communication Journal, 65(1), 16-33. https://doi.org/10.1080/10417949909373153
30.
LabarberaR. (2013). The relationship between students’ perceived sense of connectedness to the instructor and satisfaction in online courses. The Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 14(4), 209-220.
31.
LambrinidisG. (2014). Supporting online, non-traditional students through the introduction of effective e-learning tools in a pre-university tertiary enabling programme. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 36(3), 257-267. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2014.899053
32.
LanningS. K.BrickhouseT. H.GunsolleyJ. C.RansonS. L.WillettR. M. (2011). Communication skills instruction: An analysis of self, peer-group, student instructors and faculty assessment. Patient Education and Counseling, 83(2), 145-151. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2010.06.024
33.
LannuttiP. J.StraumanE. C. (2006). Classroom communication: The influence of instructor self-disclosure on student evaluations. Communication Quarterly, 54(1), 89-99. https://doi.org/10.1080/01463370500270496
34.
MarksR. B.SibleyS. D.ArbaughJ. B. (2005). A structural equation model of predictors for effective online learning. Journal of Management Education, 29(4), 531-563. https://doi.org/10.1177/1052562904271199
35.
McLeanS.AttardiS. M. (2023). Sage or guide? Student perceptions of the role of the instructor in a flipped classroom. Active Learning in Higher Education, 24(1), 49-61. https://doi.org/10.1177/1469787418793725
36.
MooreJ. (2014). Effects of online interaction and instructor presence on students’ satisfaction and success with online undergraduate public relations courses. Journalism and Mass Communication Educator, 69(3), 271-288. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077695814536398
37.
MsambwaM. M.WenZ.DanielK. (2025). The impact of AI on the personal and collaborative learning environments in higher education. European Journal of Education, 60(1), e12909. https://doi.org/10.1111/ejed.12909
NguyenM. H.GruberJ.MarlerW.HunsakerA.FuchsJ.HargittaiE. (2021). Staying connected while physically apart: Digital communication when face-to-face interactions are limited. New Media and Society, 24(9), 2046-2067. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444820985442
40.
NussbaumJ. F.ScottM. D. (1979). Instructor communication behaviors and their relationship to classroom learning. Annals of the International Communication Association, 3(1), 561-583. https://doi.org/10.1080/23808985.1979.11923783
41.
O’SullivanS. M.KhraibiA. A.ChenW.CorridonP. R. (2021). Challenges faculty faced transitioning to e-learning platforms during the current pandemic in the United Arab Emirates. Journal of Medical Education and Curricular Development, 8, 238212052110258. https://doi.org/10.1177/23821205211025858
42.
OzerM.ZhangG. (2021). Interpersonal relationships and creativity at work: A network building perspective. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 39(3), 312-333. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpim.12575
43.
PangrazioL.GodheA. L.LedesmaA. G. L. (2020). What is digital literacy? A comparative review of publications across three language contexts. E-Learning and Digital Media, 17(6), 442-459. https://doi.org/10.1177/2042753020946291
44.
ParnesM. F.Suárez-OrozcoC.Osei-TwumasiO.SchwartzS. E. O. (2020). Academic outcomes among diverse community college students: What is the role of instructor relationships?Community College Review, 48(3), 277-302. https://doi.org/10.1177/0091552120909908
45.
PhanT. A. (2024). AI integration for communication skills: A conceptual framework in education and business. Business and Professional Communication Quarterly. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/23294906241302000
46.
PhanT. A. (2025). The role of positive communication in enhancing educational outcomes. Business and Professional Communication Quarterly. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/23294906251345789
47.
PhanT. A.BuiV. D. (2025). AI with a heart: How perceived authenticity and warmth shape trust in healthcare chatbots. Journal of Marketing Communications, 1-21.
48.
PhanT. A.NinhT. T. D. (2024). The impact of company field trips and representative image on students’ CSR knowledge sharing intentions. Business and Professional Communication Quarterly. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/23294906241237721.
49.
PhanT. A.NinhT. T. D. (2025). Enhancing business communication: Comparing teaching styles in supply chain education. Business and Professional Communication Quarterly. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/23294906251315836
50.
PhanT. A.VuT. H. N.VoN. T. N.LeT. H. (2024). Enhancing educational outcomes through strategic guest speaker selection: A comparative study of alumni and industry experts in university settings. Business and Professional Communication Quarterly. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/23294906241263035
51.
PutulowskiJ. R.CrosbyR. G. (2019). Effect of personalized instructor-student e-mail and text messages on online students’ perceived course quality, social integration with faculty, and institutional commitment. Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory and Practice, 21(2), 184-201. https://doi.org/10.1177/1521025117696823
52.
RazzaqueA. (2020). M-learning improves knowledge sharing over e-learning platforms to build higher education students’ social capital. SAGE Open, 10(2). https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244020926575
53.
Romm-LivermoreC. (2014). E-learning, traditional education, and the corporatizing of higher education. Journal of Information Technology Case and Application Research, 16(1), 3-8). https://doi.org/10.1080/15228053.2014.912468
54.
SchrodtP. (2003). Students’ appraisals of instructors as a function of students’ perceptions of instructors’ aggressive communication. Communication Education, 52(2), 106-121. https://doi.org/10.1080/03634520302468
55.
ScottM. D.NussbaumJ. F. (1981). Student perceptions of instructor communication behaviors and their relationship to student evaluation. Communication Education, 30(1), 44-53. https://doi.org/10.1080/03634528109378452
56.
ShanS.LiC.ShiJ.WangL.CaiH. (2014). Impact of effective communication, achievement sharing and positive classroom environments on learning performance. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 31(3), 471-482. https://doi.org/10.1002/sres.2285
57.
SidelingerR. J. (2010). College student involvement: An examination of student characteristics and perceived instructor communication behaviors in the classroom. Communication Studies, 61(1), 87-103. https://doi.org/10.1080/10510970903400311
58.
SmithG. G.FergusonD.CarisM. (2002). Teaching on-line versus face-to-face. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 30(4), 337-364.
59.
TevenJ. J. (2007). Teacher caring and classroom behavior: Relationships with student affect and perceptions of teacher competence and trustworthiness. Communication Quarterly, 55(4), 433-450. https://doi.org/10.1080/01463370701658077
60.
TevenJ. J.GorhamJ. (1998). A qualitative analysis of low-inference student perceptions of teacher caring and non-caring behaviors within the college classroom. International Journal of Phytoremediation, 15(3), 288-298. https://doi.org/10.1080/08824099809362125
61.
TevenJ. J.McCroskeyJ. C. (1997). The relationship of perceived teacher caring with student learning and teacher evaluation. Communication Education, 46(1), 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1080/03634529709379069
62.
TrippT. M.JiangL.OlsonK.GrasoM. (2019). The fair process effect in the classroom: Reducing the influence of grades on student evaluations of teachers. Journal of Marketing Education, 41(3), 173-184. https://doi.org/10.1177/0273475318772618
63.
WashingtonG. Y. (2019). The learning management system matters in face-to-face higher education courses. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 48(2), 255-275. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047239519874037
64.
WaterfieldD. A.WatsonL.DayJ. (2024). Applying artificial intelligence in special education: Exploring availability and functionality of AI platforms for special educators. Journal of Special Education Technology, 39(3), 448-454. https://doi.org/10.1177/01626434241257237
XieJ.CorreiaA. P. (2024). The effects of instructor participation in asynchronous online discussions on student performance: A systematic review. British Journal of Educational Technolog, 55(1), 71-89. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13350
YinH.ShiL. (2022). Which type of interpersonal interaction better facilitates college student learning and development in China: Face-to-face or online?ECNU Review of Education, 5(1), 9-36. https://doi.org/10.1177/20965311211010818
