# Developing an Institutional AI Digital Assistant in an Age of Industry 5.0
## 1 Introduction  
The emergence of Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) [1, 2, 3] and AI Digital Assistants (AIDA) [4, 5] in particular has introduced several new opportunities and challenges for education in the age of Industry 5.0 [6, 7]. Publicly available AIDAs (p-AIDAs) such as ChatGPT have rapidly gained traction among students for academic support, offering real-time feedback, content explanations, and writing assistance [1, 8, 9, 10, 11]. For example, a recent survey by Freeman [12] showed that 88% of UK students indicated to use GenAI for assessments. These p-AIDA tools exemplify the potential of AI to personalize learning, enhance engagement, and provide on-demand support at scale. In response, educational researchers and institutions have started exploring the pedagogical affordances and limitations of AIDAs, particularly in supporting learner autonomy, motivation, and academic performance [1, 2, 3, 13, 14, 15]. Existing studies highlight the promise of GenAI in higher education while simultaneously raising critical concerns around data privacy, academic integrity, and the ethical use of AI-generated content, especially when students rely on non-institutional systems that lack alignment with course contexts and learning goals [3, 5, 11].  
There remain important gaps in our understanding of how students might engage with AIDA tools embedded within institutional ecosystems (i-AIDA). Several institutions might want to provide a safe \"walled garden\" for their students to engage with GenAI within the institutional boundaries given the previous concerns highlighted [4; 5; 13]. However, there is limited empirical research on how learners perceive the usefulness and ease of use of i-AIDAs designed with pedagogical intent and integrated into formal course structures. Furthermore, few studies have explored how different design features (e.g., chat, quiz, flashcard functions) impact student engagement. While several recent large-scale surveys [1; 4; 12] have captured broad student attitudes towards GenAI, in-depth, experience-based analyses of learner interactions with i-AIDAs in authentic educational settings are still lacking. Additionally, little is known about the nature of learner prompts to i-AIDAs, and what these prompts might reveal about learners' goals, expectations, and support needs in the context of Industry 5.0.  
Therefore, in order to address these gaps, we conducted a beta-test of an institutionally developed AI Digital Assistant (i-AIDA) at the UK's largest distance-learning university, co-designed using Design-Based Research (DBR) principles [16; 17; 18] and evaluated through the lens of the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) [19; 20]. Eighteen students with diverse attitudes towards GenAI and i-AIDA in particular participated in guided sessions, and interacting with i-AIDA's chat, quiz, and flashcard functions. Drawing on pre-post surveys, think-aloud protocols, screenshares, and prompt analysis this study explored: (1) whether and how students' perceptions of i-AIDA changed following direct engagement; (2) which design features were seen as valuable for supporting distance learning in line with Education 5.0 principles; and (3) what kinds of prompts students submitted, and what these reveal about learner needs and expectations. Through this application of Industry 5.0, we aim to provide nuanced insights into the pedagogical potential, technical challenges, and user experiences associated with i-AIDA.