The role of AI agents in fostering inclusivity for HEIs’ students with special needs against backdrops of the accreditation trend

Abstract

Purpose

This paper aims to study the role of artificial intelligence (AI) agents in creating a climate of inclusion for people with special needs in the higher education sector (HES).

Design/methodology/approach

A qualitative methodology is used in this research that is mainly based on semistructured interviews conducted with the top ten universities in Lebanon with deans, information technology managers, professors and administrative officers.

Findings

This paper highlights findings related to the current status of the higher education institutions (HEIs) in Lebanon vis-à-vis their accreditation and quality assurance processes in accommodating and creating a climate of inclusion for people with special needs. The results show the important role of AI agents in aiding HEI in creating such a climate of inclusion for people with special needs.

Originality/value

The study sheds light on existing gaps in the literature related to creating a climate of inclusion for people with special needs in HEI. Additionally, there is yet a lack of research that focuses on the role of AI technology in general and AI agents in particular in fostering a climate of inclusion for people with special needs within the HES.

Citation

Chedrawi, C., Kazoun, N. and Kokkinaki, A. (2024), "The role of AI agents in fostering inclusivity for HEIs’ students with special needs against backdrops of the accreditation trend", Quality Assurance in Education, Vol. 32 No. 4, pp. 582-596. https://doi.org/10.1108/QAE-01-2024-0010

1. Introduction

The higher education sector (HES) has become increasingly competitive in recent years (Holst, 2023). Higher education institutions (HEIs) are competing on a global scale to secure a competitive advantage, attract international students and most critically achieve accreditation and quality assurance. This is because a strong academic reputation appeals to top-tier students, faculty and research opportunities (Kehal, 2020). Indeed, HEIs place a strong emphasis on accreditation and quality assurance trends to ensure that both institutions and their programs meet established standards of excellence. However, the trend of accreditation, particularly in business schools, is identified as a “temporary isomorphic legitimacy tool” with universities pursuing identical objectives and goals (Chedrawi et al., 2019). This trend is leading to McDonaldization characterized by rationalization and standardization effects without taking into consideration the real purposes behind accreditation and quality assurance. For instance, considerations about creating a climate of inclusion for individuals with special needs are often overlooked. In the context of this evolving landscape, the movement toward quality assurance and accreditation in HEIs is unfolding within a significant digital era marked by advancements in artificial intelligence (AI). According to Haddade et al. (2024), there are strategies and developments aimed at enhancing the quality of higher education in this digital age. In this scenario, AI agents or chatbots represent a notable technological advancement in HEIs, facilitating continuous user interaction and prompt responses (Bodea et al., 2022). These agents are engineered to mimic human conversation or interaction with users via text, voice or other communication forms, using AI techniques and machine learning to comprehend and generate responses that are human-like to user inputs (Raulinaitis, 2022). Recently, they have been used in HEIs and universities for various purposes, including course registration, 24/7 support, personalized recommendations, exams and more (Chiu et al., 2023). Consequently, the question arises as to what role these AI agents/chatbots might play in fostering an appropriate climate of inclusion for individuals with special needs within the HES.

To delve deeper into the role of AI agents and their impact on the inclusion of individuals with special needs in HEIs, this paper will begin with an extensive literature review that encompasses accreditation, quality assurance, McDonaldization in the HES, AI agents/chatbots and individuals with special needs. Following this, the paper will use a qualitative methodology, using semistructured interviews with deans, information technology (IT) managers and professors from the top ten universities in Lebanon. The findings will then be presented and discussed. The article will conclude by offering recommendations for HEIs and outlining the implications, limitations and avenues for future research.

Recently, there is a growing awareness about the importance of providing equitable and inclusive educational opportunities for students/learners with special needs and more work is demanded on this front especially from HEIs to ensure that students/learners receive the support, accommodations and resources to succeed (Tyldesley-Marshall et al., 2023). Although, some readiness approaches for education of people with special needs has been taken into consideration recently within HEIs (Al-Tkhayneh et al., 2023), a lot of work is still needed to foster a real climate of inclusion for them.

In this regard, the trend of quality assurance and accreditation in HEIs is unfolding within a digital era marked by advancements in AI. According to Haddade et al. (2024), there are strategies and developments aimed at enhancing the quality of higher education in the digital era. In this context, AI agents/chatbots emerge as a significant technological advancement in HEIs for continuous user interactions and quick response (Bodea et al., 2022). These agents are engineered to mimic human conversation or interaction with users through text, voice or other forms of communication, using long language models and machine learning, to comprehend prompts and generate responses that are akin to human reactions (Raulinaitis, 2022). Recently, they have been used in HEIs and universities for various purposes including course registration, 24/7 support, personalized recommendations and examinations (Chiu et al., 2023). Therefore, the question arises as to what role these AI agents/chatbots could play in fostering an inclusive environment for individuals with special needs in the HES.

To thoroughly explore the role of AI agents and their impact on the inclusion of individuals with special needs in HEIs, this study will first undertake a comprehensive literature review. The review will cover topics such as accreditation, quality assurance and McDonaldization in the HES, in addition to examining AI agents/chatbots and their relevance to people with special needs. Subsequently, this research will use a qualitative methodology based on semistructured interviews with deans, IT managers and professors from the top ten universities in Lebanon. This will be followed by the presentation and discussion of the findings. The article highlights several recommendations for HEIs and will conclude by addressing implications, limitations and suggestions for future research.

2. Literature review

2.1 Accreditation and the McDonaldization of the higher education institutions

A HEI’s reputation, ability to attract new students and the employability of its graduates are all positively affected by its level of accreditation (Muslim et al., 2023; Chedrawi et al., 2019). Seow et al. (2023) and Cossani et al. (2022) stated that accreditation increases an institution’s chances of sustainability by publicly recognizing it as meeting the minimum acceptable requirements through an evaluation procedure. (3) Numerous challenges exist throughout an accreditation process, as accreditation bodies have modified their procedures and standards in response to internal and external stakeholders’ requirements (Volkwein et al., 2007). Moreover, HEIs are under increasing pressure to meet the newly established standards for sustainable education and to enhance educational practices as described in the 2022 report of the Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB), the premier accrediting body for business schools, globally. Nonetheless, this accreditation trend is leading toward a phenomenon referred to as the “McDonaldization” of the HEIs. Indeed, the phenomenon known as “McDonaldization” arises when an organization becomes so influential within a country that it begins to extend its impact globally, this tendency is known as “McDonaldization” (Ritzer, 2021). This trend is characterized by large-volume, cost-efficient organizational procedures and practices across various sectors, leading to an increasing dominance of formal rationalities in society (Kazoun et al., 2022; Ritzer and Miles, 2019). According to Ritzer (2018), McDonaldization is defined by four main characteristics: efficiency, which is based on using the most effective strategies to meet customers’ expectations; predictability, which assures consistency of products and services; control, which maximizes efficiency and authority through the use of clearly marked lines; and efficiency and calculability, which emphasizes the quantitative features of products and services provided.

This phenomenon is precisely what is happening in the HES globally with the AACSB; indeed, HEIs are adopting comparable processes to fulfil accreditation requirements and comply quality assurance standards, and thus resulting in conspicuous standardization, thereby precipitating rationalization and McDonaldization effects (Elgendy et al., 2023). Such temporary isomorphic legitimacy tool (Chedrawi et al., 2019) may not be detrimental if HEIs take these standards to elevate their practices by creating, for instance, an inclusive environment in general and for individuals with special needs in particular. However, the question remains: are they achieving this?

2.2 Individuals with special needs and inclusivity in higher education institutions

Individuals with special needs may experience behavioral or physical disabilities or a combination thereof such as dyslexia, attention deficiency disorders and challenges in learning and performing tasks in conventional ways, which calls for specialized educational support for them (Tyldesley-Marshall et al., 2023). The concept of inclusivity refers to the creation of a positive climate for diversity through unbiased organizational practices, thereby enabling all individuals to maintain their cultural identities (Nishii, 2013). An inclusive work or educational setting is characterized as a nonthreatening space in which employees and students feel comfortable being their authentic selves and sharing their ideas freely (Cudney et al., 2023; Mor Barak et al., 1998). However, achieving inclusivity remains one of the most significant challenges faced by educational systems globally (Ainscow, 2005).

Nishii (2013) identified three characteristics that define an inclusive organizational environment. With the goal of eradicating discrepancies in enterprises based on demographics and identity group memberships, the first component addresses the fairness of employment procedures and employees’ views of justice. Changing patterns of contact and working to promote interpersonal integration among diverse personnel constitute the second dimension, which extends beyond equitable human resources policies. This is vital because prior studies have shown that workers may experience psychological disengagement from their jobs if they act in a way that conforms to organizational stereotypes. Consistent with earlier research by Mor Barak and Cherin (1998), the third factor focuses on participation in decision-making. These characteristics are applicable to both employees and students with special needs in HEIs.

Acedo et al. (2009) emphasized that inclusive education is a key component of educational systems worldwide. This approach fosters an inclusive environment ensuring that every student, regardless of personal challenges, is granted complete and equal access to mainstream education programs (Nguyen, 2023). The primary objective of inclusive education is to facilitate learning opportunities for all students, regardless of their background or abilities (Hoare and Goad, 2022).

Nevertheless, the question arises whether accreditation and quality assurance processes are effectively contributing to the creation of such an inclusive climate. Additionally, it is worth exploring the role of AI technology and AI agents in promoting inclusivity in educational settings.

2.3 Artificial intelligence agents/chatbots and people with special needs in higher education institutions

The field of AI has taken a prominent place in research and practice across various disciplines for the past years (Banh and Strobel, 2023). The potential for efficiency benefits and general quality-of-life enhancements offered by AI-based technology is considerable (Heeg and Avraamidou, 2023). Ongsulee (2017) defines research in AI is defined as the exploration of “intelligent agents” referring to any technology that can perceive its environment and take actions to maximizes its likelihood of achieving a specific goal. Despite the dual-edged nature of AI’s emergence – introducing both groundbreaking opportunities and challenges to contemporary society (Shams et al., 2023), various studies have identified the technology’s potential to support individuals with special needs (Kinoshita et al., 2023; Kumagai and Nagai, 2022).

AI agents have a broad spectrum of potential applications. Topol (2019) discussed how AI agents are revolutionizing the field by aiding in diagnostics and tailoring treatment plans to individual patients. In the financial industry, AI agents enhance efficiency and security through their roles in algorithmic trading and fraud detection as detailed in García et al. (2017). Furthermore, Al-Fuqaha et al. (2015) illustrated how AI agents in smart homes improve energy efficiency and users’ convenience by managing smart devices accordingly. These diverse applications underscore the versatility of AI agents and suggest a promising future for their role in decision-making and industry innovation.

Lately, AI agents and chatbots, especially those based on generative artificial intelligence (GAI) (ChatGPT, Barb, Claude, etc.) become a major disruptor in the digital landscape, where, in terms of quality and relevance to context, these agents can produce content that is nearly indetectable from human-created material (Dwivedi et al., 2023). By using AI and machine learning techniques, these agents are programmed to comprehend and provide responses to user input that are very similar to human speech, text or other types of communication (Raulinaitis, 2022). GAI is now considered as a new tool that has the potential to revolutionize many industries, including education, health care and networked business (Brand et al., 2023; Burger et al., 2023). According to Einola and Khoreva (2023), the use of AI agents can remarkably increase users’ support, pave the way for better automation and inspire new kinds of human–machine interaction; it has the potential to make significant contributions to the area of education, particularly in facilitating the integration of students with special needs into HEIs (Garg and Sharma, 2020).

Indeed, AI-driven tools might be able to enhance an inclusive educational environment, in which all students, teachers and staff are considered to be part of the learning community and are guaranteed equitable access to instructional resources that promote their individual and collective development (Toyokawa et al., 2023). Furthermore, AI tools can aid people with hearing, vision, movement or learning disabilities during their educational path; they can increase the assistance of learners and teachers in identifying and meeting the specific requirements of their students, improving alignment with accreditation standards (Garg and Sharma, 2020). Finally, for Starks and Reich (2023), AI agents can contribute to breaking down barriers and promoting equal access to information for people with special needs, aligning with the principles of universal design and inclusivity.

Henceforth, can AI agents/chatbots contribute to the field of education and improve the climate of inclusion for people with special needs and their full integration within the Lebanese HEIs?

3. Methodology and context

HEIs in Lebanon have consistently played a pivotal role in enhancing governance, ensuring students’ access to high-quality education and empowering learners from diverse backgrounds to emerge as proactive contributors to social transformation (European Union, 2022). Over the past decade, universities in Lebanon have intensified their commitment to meeting accreditation standards as part of a broader effort to align with global ranking trends (Sacre et al., 2023). This commitment is particularly focused on elevating educational standards and fostering professional growth. Through accreditation, there is a concerted effort to promote inclusivity with the aim of preparing individuals to excel in diverse and international contexts (Hoare and Goad, 2022). The primary objective of accrediting HEIs is to enhance both education and professional development by advocating for inclusivity, thereby equipping individuals to thrive in an increasingly diverse and globalized world (Mattar, 2022). However, in the past few years, many social, political and economic issues have been plaguing Lebanon and affecting negatively the HES, adding to the impact of the COVID-19 epidemic. As a result, interest in the adoption of technological tools in the Lebanese HES is continuously growing (UNESCO, 2021). This crisis has badly impacted education programs in Lebanon in general, and for those pertaining to students with special needs in specific (UNICEF, 2022).

Hence, Lebanon’s unique context offers a solid foundation for valuable insights to study the role that could AI agents have to improve the climate of inclusion for people with special needs within the Lebanese HES’ accreditation trend.

To dynamically analyze the role of AI agents in creating a climate of inclusion for people with special needs in the Lebanese HES, we will use an exploratory approach (Gephart, 2004). To explore and understand the meaning individuals or groups ascribe to a social or human problem (Creswell, 2013), our methodology is based on a qualitative interpretive case study (Klein and Myers, 1999) collected from the top ten universities in Lebanon. According to Cornejo et al. (2023), a qualitative methodology allows us to experimentally tackle the multi-faceted nature of different social and personal circumstances and problems while highlighting the significance of subjective processes and the meanings that individuals and communities generate.

Thus, data were collected through 30 semistructured, in-depth interviews conducted with chief technology officers/managers of the IT department (IT1, IT2, …, IT10), deans of business schools (D1, D2, …, D5), professors (P1, P2, …, P8) and administrative officers (A1, …, A7). Data collection took place from June 2023 until October 2023. Secondary data were also added to the data collected from interviews (written reports, websites […], and analysis was performed using the NVIVO software.

4. Results and discussion

The findings from our qualitative investigation conducted across the top ten universities in Lebanon showed a growing body of empirical evidence concerning accreditation and the McDonaldization effects. Additionally, the results shed light on interviewees’ attitudes and actions concerning the utilization of AI agents and their significance in the realms of inclusion for students/learners with special needs within the HES.

4.1 Accreditation and the McDonaldization of the Lebanese higher education sector

Table 1 records the interviewed universities and their progress toward AACSB and other types of accreditations.

The results show that some of the interviewed HEIs have already attained accreditation while others are actively working toward it. This means that all the universities we interviewed share a common commitment toward accreditation and quality assurance. This shared objective among HEIs results in a kind of mimetic behavior or isomorphism (Chedrawi et al., 2019), where each institution emulates the practices of others, ultimately leading to a process of rationalization, as noted by Pierce and Beames (2022). Testimonies from IT1, IT2, IT3, D1, D2, P7, P8, IT6 and IT9 highlight the value attributed to accreditation in improving university rankings, educational standards and attracting students and consequently ensuring sustainable education, confirming the work of Chedrawi et al. (2019).

Hence, the accreditation trend in the Lebanese HEI is within a frame of isomorphism and McDonaldization which could be acceptable if they are taking these standards to a higher level by fostering a climate of inclusion for students/learners with special needs. But are they?

4.2 People with special needs and the higher education institutions climate of inclusion

We addressed the Lebanese top ten universities to identify their status regarding the consideration of students/learners with special needs and their situation toward the involvement and inclusion of these people for sustainable education goals, accreditation and quality assurance purposes. Table 2 encapsulates the thoughts and perceptions of the interviewees, from which two major findings were discerned: the first one is related to how the HEIs are taking into consideration the accommodation of students/learners with special needs; the second finding is related to interviewees’ opinions and thoughts related to the importance of creating a climate of inclusion for students/learners with special needs.

In fact, all interviewed HEIs with no exception are taking into consideration the necessity of ensuring a suitable accommodation and feedback mechanisms for students/learners and staff with special needs. For instance, D2, D3 and IT1 indicated that “university buildings, classrooms, and libraries are build in a way to support people with physical difficulties”. Additionally, elevators, accessible restrooms and parking spaces are available for these people. IT5, P2, A1 and A4 shared their opinion regarding “the existence of customized feedback mechanisms to allow students/learners and staff with special needs report barriers or challenges they face”. A1 added “the presence of a mental health services department and a disability support office for students and staff to determine and implement appropriate accommodations”. This only proves that Lebanese HEIs are focusing only on the technical and accommodation level, confirming the work of Lovett (2021) who indicated the necessity of giving people with special needs educational accommodations to achieve educational equity.

Regarding inclusivity for individuals with special needs, participants A2, IT4, IT5 and P3, emphasized that “universities must prioritize the inclusion of individuals with special needs for multiple reasons that align with diversity, equity, and accessibility values”. D5, IT1 and A3 highlighted that “a suitable climate of inclusion is responsible to ensure a fair society by breaking down barriers that may hinder the educational progress of individuals with special needs and to guarantee fairness and equality between all learners and staff”.

This indicates their positive intentions toward establishing a conductive environment for inclusion albeit with limited concrete outcome. There is a need for further action to align with the findings of Nishii (2013) who discussed fairness among individuals and the research of Tyldesley-Marshall et al. (2023) which posited that an inclusive educational environment offers fair and equal opportunities for individuals with special needs to develop academically, socially and in communication skills. Moreover, failing to provide reasonable accommodations for people with disabilities constitutes a violation of human rights.

Furthermore, it is critical to consider the urgency of aligning with the United Nations Development Program (UNDP, 2023) 2023 report, which pertains to Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) 10 and 16. It is noted that SDG 10 emphasizes the importance of reducing inequalities among individuals to enhance fairness and equality, while SDG 16 focuses on promoting justice.

Based on these findings, it is evident that HEIS in Lebanon are primarily concentrating on providing accommodations for individuals with special needs through physical modifications alone (such as adjustable desks, accessible seating, ramps, elevators, accessible restrooms and parking spaces). While these efforts are commendable, they are insufficient. The methodologies used in teaching, learning, cognitive processes and administrative functions should also be embedded within a robust climate of inclusion. This leads to the pivotal question: can AI agents contribute positively in this context?

4.3 Artificial intelligence agents for students/learners with special needs in the Lebanese higher education institutions

In this section, our findings reflect the current situation of the top ten universities’ in Lebanon and the opinion of the interviewees toward the adoption of AI agents and their role in fostering a climate of inclusion for students/learners with special needs.

The results show that most of questioned universities have the intention to use AI and are interested in adopting AI agents and tools because this technology can play a major role for a better inclusion of students/learners and staff with special needs in the HES. For instance, IT6, D4, P3, P7 and A7, said that “although we are not currently using AI agents/bots, but we are considering to, since it can easily ensure a continuous support for people with special needs at our university, which enhance their inclusion”. IT7, D3 and D5, indicated that “Agents and bots powered by AI are now able to ensure an assistance that is fair and equal to any individual with a special need, especially after the normal working hours, when all our offices are closed, and this is essential for a better climate of their inclusion”. Alas, “the intention to use”, “the interest in adopting” and “after hour assistance” cannot foster an appropriate climate for inclusion for students/learners with special needs in Table 3.

In fact, AI agents in education can provide answers and solutions tailored to the specific needs of students/learners with special needs; such “personalized answers” can increase the inclusion of these people; this is indeed supported in the literature by the work of Garg and Sharma (2020). Moreover, AI agents are capable of customizing learning material, user interfaces and communication strategies to accommodate the unique needs of each individual depending on their specific disability. For instance, individuals with mobility or communication challenges can experience enhanced access to information and interactions through the application of computer vision, natural language processing and speech recognition technology (Einola and Khoreva, 2023). Additionally, individuals who are visually impaired can significantly benefit from screen readers powered by AI and image recognition software capable of providing audio descriptions (Bigham et al., 2018). Those facing hearing or speech impairments may find assistance through AI-powered communication and language translation solutions. Moreover, AI-driven personalized learning platforms can support individuals with cognitive or learning disabilities by adapting to various learning styles (Barnes et al., 2019).

In this context, our findings indicate a certain level of awareness among the interviewees regarding the issue at hand: P1, D2, D4, A6 and IT 8 expressed that “we think that by giving individualized responses based on each user’s specific needs, AI agents significantly improve accessibility and support for people with disabilities”. IT1 shared a personal perspective, stating, “Personally, I have a strong intention to use an AI agent because it can support each special need, case by case; for instance, AI agents that communicate via voice instructions could be useful for people who are visually impaired, where simplified language and repeated explanations may be comforting for people with cognitive problems, enhancing then their inclusion”. Another positive outcome of using AI agents in HEIs was highlighted: the concept of fairness; in fact, our results shed light on the fairness of AI agents in interacting with people who have special needs. IT3, D5, D6, P9 and A4 think that “while not using AI bots yet, we find that when people with special needs interact with an AI bot at our university, the bot respond in a fair way regardless the user case or situation, which make them feel fairly and equally served”. This confirms the work of Toyokawa et al. (2023) regarding equitable information and the work of Starks and Reich (2023) regarding promoting equal access to information for people with special needs.

However, many negative considerations were also raised by our interviewees that show the reasons behind the reluctance in adopting AI agents in HEI, raising many considerations that should be taken into account when designing and implementing AI agents to ensure suitability and inclusion of people with special needs. For instance, IT2 and D5 expressed that “We are hesitating to implement AI bots at their HEIs because the data entry step is very necessary to provide a right answer tailored to the need of each one suffering from a special need, and this process needs a lot of preparation to make it successful”. For IT5, IT10 and D2, “If the data entry process wasn’t successful, there is a high probability of non-accurate results”. This means that the technical knowledge and data entry process is a major step to consider for a fruitful work of AI bots for the inclusion of people with special needs.

Another major point to consider is the difficulty of trusting the responses given by an AI bot. Our interviewees agreed that trusting an AI agent depends initially on the process of data input. For IT5, IT10 and D2, “People may lose faith in the system due to the high likelihood of inaccurate findings if the data entry procedure failed”. “There is a risk of a loss of trust in the results produced by AI agents if they are poorly implemented”, P2, P7 and IT7 expanded upon. This is in line with the work of Mostafa and Kasamani (2022) stating that people are prepared to use AI when they have faith in its agents, and this mainly depends from the data entry process.

The concluding point of concern identified in our findings related to the utilization of AI chatbots pertains to ethical considerations, specifically regarding the privacy and security of data provided to the bot. D5, IT1 and P12 stated that “We, as universities, should highly make attention on the privacy related to the data of people with special needs”. IT 14 clarified that “we should know before any AI bot usage in education, that security measures are important to avoid any privacy issue with people with special needs using this type of technology”. Addressing such security and privacy concerns associated with chatbots or AI technology is imperative.

These findings clearly indicate that the majority HEIs in Lebanon are either pursuing or engaged in the accreditation process solely to reach global educational standards without adequately addressing the requirements of students/learners with special needs or earnestly considering the establishment of a more inclusive environment for these individuals. It appears that the top ten Lebanese HEIs are primarily focused on providing basic accommodation equipment and tools that fall short of the comprehensive support required. While there is some consideration of adopting advanced AI systems, tools or agents to enhance inclusivity these institutions exhibit reluctance due to concerns over privacy trust and ethical considerations.

In conclusion, Lebanese HEIs have a considerable journey ahead in fully accommodating students/learners with special needs. Despite commendable efforts to improve campus accessibility, the overall environment remains insufficiently inclusive hindered by factors such as limited physical infrastructure, inadequate support services and the hesitant adoption of sophisticated technologies such as AI agents.

5. Conclusion, limitations and future research

In conclusion, this paper has endeavored to examine the role of AI agents and their impact on fostering an inclusive environment for individuals with special needs within the HES in Lebanon, against the backdrop of prevailing accreditation and quality assurance trends.

The study revealed that all HEI in Lebanon fully recognize the significance of accreditation and quality assurance for their programs. However, the focus of this accreditation predominantly aligns with the concepts of McDonaldization, rationalization and isomorphism, lacking effective strategies specifically addressing the requirements of individuals with special needs. Indeed, the current state of inclusivity within Lebanese HEIs has a considerable margin for improvements.

Furthermore, the paper indicates that while Lebanese HEIs possess the intention and aim to implement AI initiatives, there exists considerable hesitation among these institutions to deploy AI agents for the benefit of students/learners with special needs. The potential benefits of AI in this context are clear, yet the broader adoption is hindered by concerns related to privacy, trust and ethics.

The theoretical contributions of this article are threefold: first, this paper contributed to the ongoing conversation on best practices for supporting students/learners with special needs and will inspire further research, collaboration and effective teaching. Second, this study advances the literature by offering key insights for HEI practitioners and scholars with regard to the role of chatbots for adaptive and inclusive learning while filling a gap in the current literature on the use of AI chatbot technology in HEI. Furthermore, this study extends the McDonaldization theory into HEIs’ trend for accreditation and quality assurance.

It is important to underscore that AI-powered tools including speech-to-text applications, adaptive learning platforms and virtual assistants can significantly aid individuals with disabilities. the successful integration of AI into higher education hinges on accessibility, awareness and collaboration. Digital content must be rendered accessible, and institutions are encouraged to invest in the IT infrastructure capable of support AI technologies. An inclusive environment can be fostered by educating faculty and staff on the utilization of AI tools and by enhancing awareness of the benefits these tools provide. Furthermore, ongoing collaboration with experts in accessibility and disability services is vital to accurately assess individual needs and tailor AI solutions accordingly.

(1) As such accreditation is becoming more and more a standardized strategy for business schools seeking international recognition and legitimacy. Business schools’ directors and deans are invited to integrate more courses on ethics and inclusion in the business curriculum, they are invited to use and implement AI agents to ensure a solid and climate of inclusion for people with special needs involving all relevant stakeholders. They should benefit from the accreditation process with regards to awareness on the importance of inclusivity as well as AI agents’ potentials in creating personalized learning paths for those students, learners, educators and staff with special needs based on each one strengths and weaknesses. They are finally invited to develop training programs to use AI chatbots in a secure way to minimize the data privacy and safety threats and to ensure a successful data entry process to optimize the given results and increase trust in AI technology.

From a practical standpoint, this study provides professionals in the HES with valuable insights into the role of AI applications in promoting an inclusive environment for students/learners with special needs. Additionally, it alerts technology providers to the necessity of developing customized AI chatbots that could significantly contribute to the inclusion of students with special needs while also addressing the concerns related to privacy, trust and ethical issues highlighted by the interviewees. Additionally, this research advises public policymakers and nongovernmental organizations, which advocate for individuals with special needs to serve as regulators and guardians of their rights to an inclusive educational experience.

In fact, more efforts are required from Lebanese HEIs to guarantee that people with special needs receive the assistance and tools they need to thrive. Future studies can focus on building a suitable model to be tested quantitatively with a larger audience.

In conclusion, this paper is dedicated to ensuring an enhanced learning experience within an inclusive environment for students/learners with special needs. However, it is important to note that the findings are highly specific to the context of the Lebanese HES. For the purpose of generalizing these findings, further research is necessary across a broader spectrum, whether in the Middle East and North Africa region or in multiple countries.

Table 1.

Current status of Lebanese universities toward accreditation

University code	AACSB accreditation status	Other types of Accreditations (EQUIS, I., …)
U1	Accredited	ABET, CEPH, CCNE
U2	Accredited	ABET, NECHE, ACPE
U3	In the process	EQUIS, AMBAS, ABET
U4	In the process	FIBAA, ABET, RIBA, CCAPP, ADEE
U5	Not working on it	ENQA, EQUAR
U6	Accredited	NECHE, CAC, EAC of ABET
U7	In the process	EQUIS, ANS AC, CAC, EAC of ABET
U8	In the process	AAQ, WCPT
U9	In the process	–
U10	In the process	CAC, EAC of ABET, IACBE

Source: Author’s own work

Table 2.

People with special needs and the climate of inclusion

University code	Accommodation of people with special needs and systems for their needs’ communication	Importance of climate of inclusion for people with special needs
U1	• Inclusive mental health services • Systems creating customized content and activities	• Equal opportunity in society by removing obstacles to special education • A fruitful educational journey, since students with disabilities possess extraordinary abilities and perspectives
U2	• Accessibility of campus, classrooms and facilities to overcome physical barriers • Ramps, elevators, restrooms and parking spaces	• Same opportunity as their nondisabled classmates to attend college
U3	• Universal design for learning (UDL) for easy content and activities that can be customized to accommodate diverse learning styles and abilities	• Equal opportunity to develop academic, social and communication skills
U4	• A disability support office for students and staff for appropriate accommodations • Sign language interpreters and note-takers	• Development of empathy, teamwork and understanding, preparing students for a diverse workforce
U5	• Hybrid models to accommodate students with difficulty attending in-person classes	• Sense of involvement among students, staff and faculties
U6	• Classrooms, labs and libraries designed to accommodate individuals with mobility impairments • Adjustable desks and accessible seating	• A culture of acceptance, respect and support for diversity
U7	• A feedback mechanism to report barriers or challenges they faced	• Legal and ethical imperative • Failure to accommodate individuals with special needs goes against human rights
U8	• Accessible pathways for individuals with visual impairments • Multiple means of representation and expression	• Future workforce readiness
U9	• A disability support office for communication	• Social integration
U10	• Extended time for exams/assignments • Easy access to lectures and class materials	• Fairness and equality between learners and staff

Source: Author’s own work

Table 3.

The usage of AI agents/bots for students/learners with special needs in the Lebanese HEI

University code	AI agents usage	AI agents/bots for people with special needs
U1	Yes	• Make the university on the right track for its ranking, quality assurance and accreditation • 24/7 support for people with disabilities
U2	No	• Fair assistance particularly outside of regular business hours when personnel are not available • Fear of privacy issues
U3	Yes	• Personalized learning: with AI agents, staff and students with special needs can have answers tailored to their own teaching/learning styles and speed. • Fair interaction with users
U4	No	• Individualized answers • Nonstop support • Fear of ethical problems
U5	No	• Facing issues with data entry process as it is a very important step for personalized answers • Difficulties in trusting the AI bot responses
U6	No	• Help people having difficulties in communicating • Customized responses • Fear of trust issue
U7	No	• Continuous support for both learners and teachers • Fair engagement with any special case • Lack of technical knowledge
U8	No	• Still establishing ethical guidelines for AI agents usage to prioritize fairness, transparency and accountability
U9	No	• Hesitation based on users’ privacy • Establishment of mechanisms to be able later on to monitor AI systems for biases and unintended consequences
U10	Yes	• Customized answers • Fair responses regardless from users’ identity

Source: Author’s own work