Policy alignment and trustworthy AI governance in higher education: A Conceptual Analysis of Malaysia’s Reform Agenda and ASEAN Governance Imperatives

Kok Ban Teoh; Wee Ling Tan

doi:10.32674/eqphhh11

Authors

Kok Ban Teoh National Higher Education Research Institute, Universiti Sains Malaysia https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3252-8531
Wee Ling Tan School of Educational Studies, Universiti Sains Malaysia https://orcid.org/0009-0003-9114-7592

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.32674/eqphhh11

Keywords:

AI governance, higher education governance, higher education policy, socio-technical systems, institutional legitimacy, ASEAN

Abstract

Artificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly reshaping higher education through learning analytics, assessment support, academic integrity monitoring, student services, and institutional decision-making. This conceptual paper examines how Malaysia’s higher education reform agenda can be aligned with ASEAN AI governance imperatives through the institutional role of universities. Using a qualitative policy-informed conceptual synthesis, the study identifies four governance gaps: human-centered values and operational oversight, institutional autonomy and accountability, AI adoption and institutional capacity, and regional principles and uneven implementation readiness. This paper proposes an integrated framework that links policy vision, institutional governance, educational practice, feedback-based learning, and ASEAN regional coordination. These findings suggest that universities should act as intermediary governance actors for the adoption of trustworthy AI.

Author Biographies

Kok Ban Teoh, National Higher Education Research Institute, Universiti Sains Malaysia

Ts. Dr. Teoh Kok Ban is a Senior Lecturer at the National Higher Education Research Institute (IPPTN), Universiti Sains Malaysia. His work centers on higher education, human development, and organizational wellbeing, integrating research, counseling, and professional training to generate meaningful impact in education and society. He holds a PhD in Organizational Behavior and Development, along with Master’s degrees in Statistics and Counseling, enabling him to combine quantitative expertise with human-centered approaches. A Professional Technologist (Ts.) registered with the Malaysian Board of Technologists and a Registered Counselor with the Malaysian Board of Counselors, he bridges technical and psychological perspectives in his work. As an HRD Corp Accredited Trainer, he leads capacity-building initiatives and academic collaborations, while actively contributing to research and professional service.
Wee Ling Tan, School of Educational Studies, Universiti Sains Malaysia

Dr. Tan Wee Ling is an education specialist and Senior Lecturer in School of Educational Studies (PPIP), Universiti Sains Malaysia, with a strong focus on STEM education, digital pedagogy, and teacher professional development in Southeast Asia. Her work spans curriculum innovation, assessment design, and classroom-based research, with particular interest in game-based learning, design thinking, and the integration of emerging technologies to strengthen 21st-century competencies. As a Microsoft Global Training Partner, she designs and facilitates capacity-building programmes that support educators in adopting effective, evidence-informed digital teaching practices. Dr. Tan actively contributes to regional collaborations, workshops, and scholarly dissemination, translating research into practical strategies that improve teaching and learning outcomes across diverse educational contexts.

References

Barnett, R. (2017). The ecological university: A feasible utopia. Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315194899

Bijker, W. E., Hughes, T. P., & Pinch, T. J. (2012). The social construction of technological systems: New directions in the sociology and history of technology. MIT Press.

Jabareen, Y. (2009). Building a conceptual framework: Philosophy, definitions, and procedure. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 8(4), 49–62. https://doi.org/10.1177/160940690900800406 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/160940690900800406

Jasanoff, S. (2016). The ethics of invention: Technology and the human future. W. W. Norton & Company.

Kroll, J. A., Huey, J., Barocas, S., Felten, E. W., Reidenberg, J. R., Robinson, D. G., & Yu, H. (2017). Accountable algorithms. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 165(3), 633–705.

Marginson, S. (2018). Higher education, economic inequality and social mobility: Implications for emerging East Asia. International Journal of Educational Development, 63, 4–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedudev.2017.03.002 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedudev.2017.03.002

Miller, R. (2018). Transforming the future: Anticipation in the 21st century. UNESCO.

Ministry of Higher Education Malaysia. (2026). Rancangan Pendidikan Tinggi Malaysia 2026–2035. Ministry of Higher Education.

OECD. (2021). AI in education: Challenges and opportunities. OECD Publishing.

Shattock, M. (2014). International trends in university governance: Autonomy, self-government and the distribution of authority. Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315769028

Stilgoe, J., Owen, R., & Macnaghten, P. (2013). Developing a framework for responsible innovation. Research Policy, 42(9), 1568–1580. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2013.05.008 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2013.05.008

Suchman, M. C. (1995). Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches. Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 571–610. https://doi.org/10.2307/258788 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/258788

UNESCO. (2023). Guidance for generative AI in education and research. UNESCO.

van den Hoven, J., Vermaas, P. E., & van de Poel, I. (2015). Handbook of ethics, values, and technological design. Springer. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-6970-0

Williamson, B., & Eynon, R. (2020). Historical threads, missing links, and future directions in AI in education. Learning, Media and Technology, 45(3), 223–235. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2020.1798995 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2020.1798995