UvA panel

In 2025, the UvA Panel conducted a quantitative study on the use of generative AI tools (GenAI), such as ChatGPT, Copilot and UvA AI Chat, among students and staff of the University of Amsterdam. The aim of the study was to gain insight into how often and for what purposes GenAI is used, which opportunities and risks are perceived, and what kind of support or guidelines are needed. The results provide a broad and nuanced picture: for many respondents, GenAI has become part of their daily study and work routines, while at the same time raising questions about reliability, skills development, assessment, and responsible use.

For this study, a questionnaire was distributed among UvA students and staff. A total of 327 students and 208 staff members participated.

Below, the key findings are summarised.

• A large majority (around 70%) of students use GenAI weekly or more often. About one in ten students report never using GenAI.
• GenAI is mainly used as a supportive tool rather than as a full replacement of one’s own work. ChatGPT (84%) and Grammarly (72%) are mentioned as the most commonly used tools.
• Nearly a quarter of respondents indicate that they have never heard of UvA AI Chat.
• Students primarily use GenAI to explain difficult concepts, summarize study materials, formulate and improve texts, prepare for exams, and gain a clearer overview of course content.
  • GenAI is also frequently used privately as a search engine (58% of students), especially outside the direct educational context.
• Many students experience GenAI as accessible and helpful for study skills they previously struggled with, such as academic writing and understanding complex material.
• At the same time, the results show that students are aware of potential risks, such as copying incorrect information without verification, a possible decline in their own learning and thinking processes, and uncertainty about what is and is not allowed within education and assessment.
• Finally, a majority of students indicate a need for clear guidelines, explanations on responsible use, and support in developing AI skills (AI literacy), preferably integrated into education.

This study forms part of the evaluation of the UvA policy framework and guidelines on GenAI in education. Based on the results, actions can and will be taken to support the implementation of this policy within the faculties. For example, through more targeted communication and by informing faculties about how students and staff are already using GenAI, as well as the concerns they have regarding GenAI in work and study, so that these topics can be addressed within the policy.

The Reporting Point for Social Safety and Integrity (SVI) launched on 1 October 2025. The study examined to what extent the reporting point functions as intended, and how users and stakeholders experience it.

For this study a questionnaire was sent to students and staff. A total of 235 students (65% Dutch and 35% international) and 163 staff members participated.

The study results show:

• Of the students, 59% feel that it is possible within the UvA to openly discuss experiences related to social (un)safety. 39% know who they can turn to, and 25% know where to find information about reporting options.

During the questionnaire, respondents were shown an image with information about the reporting options for social safety and integrity at the UvA to give them an impression of the system.

• For 80% of the students, after seeing the image with information about the Reporting Point, the reporting channels were clear, 82% found the range of reporting options easy to understand, and 75% can easily determine where to go with questions or experiences.
• 78% expect that reports will be taken seriously, and 82% believe that reports will be treated confidentially. 65% feel able to express concerns within the UvA without negative consequences.
• 60% of students feel that the current range of reporting options meets the needs of staff, students, and others, and 47% prefer a single central reporting point.
• 14 of the 235 students had contact with one of the reporting facilities in the past year, mainly with the study adviser (11) and the student psychologist (5). Six students were satisfied with the follow-up to their report, four were neutral, and four were dissatisfied.
• 30% feel that the reporting options at the UvA are (much) better than expected, and 49% feel they are comparable to what you may expect from a university.
• The Reporting Point for Social Safety and Integrity is running an awareness campaign. Students were shown several quotes and were asked on a scale from 1 to 10 which quotes appealed to them the most. The following quote was rated highest:
  'The confidential adviser lent a listening ear. I was able to share my story in a private conversation.'

The project team uses the outcomes of this research to implement targeted improvements in the design, communication, and working processes of the reporting system. They are working towards a more accessible and transparent reporting structure, further developing the reporting point (including the possibility of anonymous reporting and potentially also the option to ask questions), and increasing its visibility and findability. In addition, they aim to place greater emphasis on behavior that contributes to a socially safe environment, so that the focus is not solely on undesirable behaviour. The research will be repeated next year to assess whether the implemented changes have led to improvements.

Due to declining enrolment and budget cuts, the University of Amsterdam is exploring how to secure and innovate its language and culture programs, potentially by merging them into a new overarching program. This study compares the experiences and motivations of different student groups to inform the design of a flexible curriculum. 

Focus groups show that students from related fields are interested in language and culture, but do not choose a full degree because of perceived limited career prospects, a preference for broader programs, and the idea that language and culture mainly adds value alongside another discipline. Students of the Faculty of Humanities (Fgw) share the desire for broad, flexible study paths but also lack a clear sense of future career options.

Although many students view language and culture studies as narrow, current FGw students experience them as broad, suggesting a gap between perception and reality. The challenge is to highlight this existing breadth—or broaden options further—without losing academic depth. 

An initial program design was presented in February 2025 and is now being refined with input from students and staff. A full proposal will be submitted in February 2026.

In collaboration with the Communications Office (BC) and the WISH team from ICTS, several pages of the MyUvA app and the mobile student website were tested. The aim of the research was to identify potential bottlenecks and opportunities for improvement, partly due to the recently added section on the home page. During the user tests, attention was given both to information relevant for the editorial office (such as terminology, content, and accessibility of topics) and to information relevant for team WISH (such as page structure and visible components).

A total of five students participated in the user tests, of which one Dutch student and four international students from the Faculty of Humanities, the Faculty of Social and Behavioural Sciences, the Amsterdam Law School and Amsterdam University College.

Students first viewed the general home page, after which the tests zoomed in more specifically on the Internships and Jobs section. They then completed various scenarios related to Studying Abroad, in which they searched for information about entry requirements, deadlines, asking questions, and events. During this process, the students’ actions were observed.

All specific insights were documented per page. From these findings, several main points became clear about the amount of information, the navigation structure and links to previous pages. Based on these insights, we formulated the following recommendations:

• Keep the focus of the home page on the timetable and grades. The rest of the page should ideally consist of a compact selection of key information and function as a hub for related information pages.
• Keep all titles and explanations as short and to the point as possible, ensuring pages remain clear and easy to scan.
• Avoid repeating information across different pages. Hyperlinks to previous or next pages also cause back-and-forth clicking and creates ‘loops’. Instead, make the overall structure clear so that students know where they are and what other pages exist.
• Structure pages chronologically wherever possible: what do students need to do or know first, and what comes next? Make a clear distinction between Need to know and Nice to know.
• Name the types of study-abroad experiences, such as 'semester abroad' and 'individual courses abroad', simply and literally, to prevent confusion. 

The topic of studying abroad is complex and contains a large amount of information, which makes a compact and straightforward presentation essential. With several explicit adjustments to the structure and content of the current pages, the displayed information can be presented more effectively, reducing confusion or frustration for both students and support staff. 

Based on these results, the app and the mobile website will be further improved by BC and ICTS.

Student Services and the Communications Office (BC) wanted to learn how students experience the University of Amsterdam’s communication about ‘Studying with a disability.’

To explore this, two focus groups were held with a total of eight students*. To ensure accessibility for all participants, students could choose to participate in either an online or an in-person session. The students shared valuable suggestions, which are summarised below by topic:

Terminology

• Because there are so many different types of disabilities, it’s difficult to use one overarching term:
  • Students with conditions such as ADHD, autism, or dyslexia felt more addressed by a heading like ‘Studying with a chronic (mental) illness or neurodivergence.’
  • Include a clear explanation of what is meant by neurodivergence.
  • Keep this in mind in future communication, and consider adding this heading alongside the current one, ‘Studying with a disability.’
• The common thread among all students is that they are looking for support during their studies. This could also be reflected in the website structure, for example: ‘Support for those with chronic (mental) illness and/or neurodivergence.’

Tone of voice

• Students prefer an active and inclusive tone from the UvA; one that openly welcomes students with any kind of condition (physical and mental) and focuses on the available support options.

Visuals

• Visual materials should preferably be general, as students with neurodivergence do not see themselves as ‘different’ or ‘special.’
• However, students emphasised the importance of using diverse imagery across the entire UvA website.

Contact

• Students would prefer to indicate once - at the start of their studies - that they have a disability, and then receive targeted information relevant to their situation.
• They also expressed a need for a central contact point where students can go both in person (at REC or the University Library) and online, at accessible times and without long waiting periods.
• In addition, students value approachable, empathetic contact persons.

Next steps

The results of this study will be used by Student Services and the Communications Office as part of the communication improvement project launched under ‘Studying with a disability’. The goal is to establish a single digital contact point for students by 1 August 2026.

* Of the eight students who took part in the focus groups, only one had a physical disability. Therefore, the findings primarily reflect the perspectives of students with non-physical disabilities and/or neurodivergence.