Integrating generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) in education has gained significant attention, particularly in flexible learning environments (FLE). This study investigates how students’ voluntary adoption of GenAI influences their perceived usefulness (PU), perceived ease of use (PEU), learning engagement (LE), and student-teacher interaction (STI). This study employed a structural equation modeling (SEM) approach, using data from 480 students across multiple academic levels. The findings confirm that voluntary GenAI adoption significantly enhances PU and PEU, reinforcing established technology acceptance models (TAM). However, PU did not directly impact LE at the latent level—an unexpected finding that underscores students’ engagement’s complex and multidimensional nature in AI-enriched settings. Conversely, PEU positively influenced LE, which in turn significantly predicted STI. These findings suggest that usability, rather than perceived utility alone, drives deeper engagement and interaction in autonomous learning contexts. This research advances existing knowledge of GenAI adoption by proposing a structural model that integrates voluntary use, learner engagement, and teacher presence. Future research should incorporate variables such as digital literacy, self-regulation, and trust and apply longitudinal approaches to better understand the evolving role of GenAI inequitable, human-centered education.

The rapid integration of artificial intelligence (AI) technologies into the field of higher education is causing widespread public discourse. However, existing research is fragmented and lacks systematic synthesis, which limits understanding of how college and university students adopt artificial intelligence technologies. To address this gap, we conducted a systematic review following the guidelines of the PRISMA statement, including studies from ScienceDirect, Web of Science, Scopus, PsycARTICLES, SOC INDEX, and Embase databases. A total of 5594 articles were identified in the database search; 112 articles were included in the review. The criteria for inclusion in the review were: (i) publication date; (ii) language; (iii) participants; (iv) object of research. The results of the study showed: (a) The Technology Acceptance Model and the Unified Theory of Technology Acceptance and Use are most often used to explain the AI acceptance; (b) quantitative research methods prevail; (c) AI is mainly used by students to search and process information; (d) technological factors are the most significant factors of AI acceptance; (e) gender, specialty, and country of residence influence the AI acceptance. Finally, several problems and opportunities for future research are highlighted, including problems of psychological well-being, students’ personal and academic development, and the importance of financial, educational, and social support for students in the context of widespread artificial intelligence.