## 4 Discussion  
Many higher education institutions worldwide [1, 2, 3, 7, 11, 13, 14, 23, 25] are grappling with the challenges of integrating AI digital assistants into their teaching and learning frameworks. While publicly available AI digital assistants (p-AIDAs), such as ChatGPT, offer broad accessibility and functionality, there is increasing interest in developing institutional AI digital assistants (i-AIDAs) tailored to specific educational contexts. Therefore, in this trend study with 315 students over an eleven-month period, we explored their perspectives on such an i-AIDA, and what individual characteristics might influence these perspectives.  
In addressing Research Question 1, findings across the three studies indicate that students maintain nuanced but similar perspectives on the role of AI in distance education, and that these perspectives did not change over a period of 11 months. While the majority (56.4%) expressed a preference for having an i-AIDA for their studies, a notable proportion remained neutral (24.1%) or disagreed (19.7%). This seemed to align with other studies conducted amongst younger students in Spain [13], as well as a larger study in over 100 countries conducted with 23,218 students by [8], although these studies only measured student perspectives at one time point. However, these results do seem different from the recent study by [9] who found that 92% of students at UK \"traditional\" universities now use GenAI for education in 2025 relative to 66% in 2024 [23]. One potential explanation might be our more specific focus on the types of services that distance learning students might expect from an i-AIDA rather than more general p-AIDA tool usage such as ChatGPT. Another potential reason might be that distance learning students, in general, might be older than traditional university students, whereby, linked to RQ2, we also found that the most keen group of i-AIDA supporters were relatively younger.  
In addressing Research Question 2, the cluster analysis identified three student groups with distinct perspectives on i-AIDAs that were significantly different in terms of age, prior experience with GenAI, and wanting institutions like the OU implementing such i-AIDAs. We identified a highly critical group (older, with higher education levels and low GenAI usage) who were sceptical and outspokenly negative about i-AIDAs, fearing that AI might replace human interaction and their educational experience as distance learning students. The second cluster, who were supporters of i-AIDAs (primarily older learners, some with GenAI experience), saw benefits but also raised concerns about ethics and environmental impact. Finally, the third and largest keen supporter cluster (younger, with lower education levels and high GenAI experience) strongly favoured AI-driven personalisation, real-time feedback, and adaptive learning. These findings suggest that perspectives on i-AIDAs are shaped by age, education, and GenAI experience, reinforcing prior research [15, 20] on technology adoption among different learner groups. Younger students with more GenAI exposure were more receptive to i-AIDAs, while older students with higher education levels tended to be more critical.  
Despite these findings, institutional adoption of i-AIDAs depends on feasibility and cost-effectiveness, especially given the rapid development of p-AIDA tools. This trend study contributes to the ongoing debate on whether institutions should develop bespoke AI solutions, advocating for a cautious yet proactive approach that involves relevant stakeholders in the decision-making process.