Generative AI tools have entered university life faster than institutions have been able to govern them, prompting policy responses that range from outright prohibition to largely unguided adoption. This paper examines the shift from restrictive to empowerment-oriented AI governance in higher education through a convergent parallel mixed-methods study comprising a structured survey (n = 71) and twenty-five semi-structured interviews across eleven academic disciplines at a private university in Bangladesh. The study documents patterns of AI adoption, stakeholder attitudes toward institutional policy, and barriers to responsible use. Participants situated within more empowerment-oriented institutional environments, including those characterised by AI literacy support, clearer ethical guidance, and stronger faculty engagement, reported greater confidence in using AI responsibly and clearer understanding of acceptable practices. By contrast, participants operating under restriction-only policies more often described uncertainty, confusion, and rule evasion. Regression analysis further showed that AI familiarity, frequency of use, and policy awareness were significantly associated with stronger support for empowerment-oriented governance. These findings inform a five-pillar framework for responsible AI integration encompassing AI Literacy Integration, Stage-Based Access, Transparent Use Norms, Assessment Innovation, and Faculty Development. Informed by stakeholder evidence and refined in dialogue with existing literature, the framework offers a practical model for institutions navigating AI governance in resource-constrained contexts. The paper contributes empirical evidence from a developing-country setting that remains underrepresented in current scholarship and highlights how responsible AI governance can support more equitable and context-sensitive higher education.

Hospital websites are necessary infrastructures for users who want to book doctor appointments, look for essential information, schedule tests, and communicate with hospital authorities. Often, the experience with hospital websites is hindered by poor usability, accessibility issues for specialized need users, outdated user interface and technical problems. For this research, we conducted a mixed-method study with public and private hospital website users in Bangladesh to evaluate their experiences and encountered difficulties with the usability and accessibility of these websites. Our findings suggest that private hospital websites have comparatively better usability, but both type of websites do not meet accessibility requirements, pointing to the need for better design interventions. This study adds to HCI research by emphasizing user insights to improve healthcare experiences in Bangladesh.

Social media platforms increasingly function as informal infrastructures to seek justice in contexts where formal justice systems are inaccessible or distrusted. We examine how Bangladeshi individuals leverage Facebook to disclose personal experiences of harm (e.g., sexual harassment, fraud, and abuse) and pursue justice. Our in-depth interviews with 18 participants unpacked the motivations, strategic choices, and sociotechnical risks involved in such disclosures. Our participants carefully navigated trade-offs between visibility, credibility, privacy, and legal vulnerability. Our findings contribute to HCI by (1) conceptualizing justice-seeking behaviors in low-trust, high-risk environments; (2) offering empirical insights into post-curation, audience targeting, and identity management; and (3) identifying design opportunities for safer, more equitable platform interactions. We present implications for platform governance and moderation, including features that support credibility, mitigate emotional harm, and enhance the legibility of justice claims. This work advances critical HCI and social computing perspectives on safety, care, and power in digital participation.