Author(s)

Li Hongwei ¹

Affiliation(s)

¹ College of Economics, Xi'an University of Finance and Economics, Xi'an, China

Corresponding Author

Li Hongwei

ABSTRACT

Digital and AI tools are increasingly used in higher education, but evidence on their integrated use in digital economy courses remains limited. This study examined eight classes of Introduction to the Digital Economy at Xi'an University of Finance and Economics. Classes were categorized as traditional or digital and AI-enhanced according to whether the teaching reform had been implemented. Data were drawn from instructor questionnaires, semi-structured interviews, class-level grades, case-analysis scores, and learning-resource access records. Descriptive comparisons showed that mean lesson preparation time was 4.50 hours in the digital and AI-enhanced instruction group and 7.50 hours in the traditional instruction group, a 40% lower value. Teaching-method diversity averaged 3.50 and 1.50, respectively. The digital and AI-enhanced instruction group also recorded higher mean grades (81.5 vs. 76.9), case-analysis scores (80.1% vs. 66.7%), digital and AI resource visits (33.2 vs. 15.3), and views of emerging-topic materials (27 vs. 14). These descriptive findings associate digital and AI-enhanced instruction with lower preparation demands, more varied teaching methods, and better course outcomes. Because the study used a small, single-institution sample and descriptive comparisons, the findings should not be interpreted as causal.

KEYWORDS

Generative artificial intelligence; Digital transformation; Teaching reform; Digital economy education; Higher education

CITE THIS PAPER

Li Hongwei. Digital and AI-Enhanced Teaching Reform in the Introduction to the Digital Economy Course. Advances in Educational Technology and Psychology (2026). Vol. 10, No. 4, 72-76. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.23977/aetp.2026.100410.

REFERENCES

[1] LIU C, XIE L, XU G. Generative AI in higher education: A meta-analysis of intellectual and social-emotional outcomes[J]. Frontiers in Psychology, 2026, 17: 1848745.
[2] KASNECI E, SESSLER K, KÜCHEMANN S, et al. ChatGPT for good? On opportunities and challenges of large language models for education[J]. Learning and Individual Differences, 2023, 103: 102274.
[3] WANG P, JING Y, SHEN S. A systematic literature review on the application of generative artificial intelligence (GAI) in teaching within higher education: Instructional contexts, process, and strategies[J]. The Internet and Higher Education, 2025, 65: 100996.
[4] GRIFFITH A S, ALTINAY Z. A framework to assess higher education faculty workload in U.S. universities[J]. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 2020, 57(6): 691–700.
[5] XIE H, CHU H C, HWANG G J, et al. Trends and development in technology-enhanced adaptive/personalized learning: A systematic review of journal publications from 2007 to 2017[J]. Computers & Education, 2019, 140: 103599.
[6] DENG R, JIANG M, YU X, et al. Does ChatGPT enhance student learning? A systematic review and meta-analysis of experimental studies[J]. Computers & Education, 2025, 227: 105224.
[7] YAN L, SHA L, ZHAO L, et al. Practical and ethical challenges of large language models in education: A systematic scoping review[J]. British Journal of Educational Technology, 2024, 55(1): 90–112.
[8] SU F, BEH W F, CHEAH K S L. Efficiency or intensification? A systematic review of generative AI and academic workload in higher education[J]. Acta Psychologica, 2026, 268: 107353.
[9] CROMPTON H, BURKE D. Artificial intelligence in higher education: The state of the field[J]. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 2023, 20: 22.

Sponsors, Associates, and Links

---

• Curriculum and Teaching Methodology
  
  
• Transactions on Comparative Education
  
  
• Applied & Educational Psychology
  
  
• Advances in Vocational and Technical Education
  
  
• Adult and Higher Education