Research Article

Generative AI in teacher education: Teacher educators’ perception and preparedness

Bismark Nyaaba Akanzire 1 , Matthew Nyaaba 2 * , Macharious Nabang 3
More Detail
1 Department of Education, Gambaga College of Education, Gambaga, GHANA2 Department of Educational Theory and Practice, University of Georgia, USA3 Department of Visual Arts Education, Bagabaga College of Education, Tamale, GHANA* Corresponding Author
Journal of Digital Educational Technology, 5(1), January 2025, ep2508, https://doi.org/10.30935/jdet/15887
Submitted: 23 September 2023, Published: 28 January 2025
OPEN ACCESS   695 Views   197 Downloads
Download Full Text (PDF)

ABSTRACT

This rapid study explores teacher educators’ perceptions of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) in teacher education, conducted through a descriptive survey involving 55 teacher educators from two colleges of education in Ghana. A convenience sampling technique was adopted for data collection, and a data analysis using exploratory factor analysis was used to identify primary factors shaping perceptions and preparedness of GenAI integration. Key findings reveal a generally positive perception among the teacher educators, who recognize GenAI’s potential to support academic achievement, increase student engagement, and improve communication within teacher education settings. The findings further indicate that the teacher educators’ background factors, such as age, years of teaching experience, department, and college, do not significantly predict their perceptions of GenAI. Since none of these measured background factors were significant predictors, this suggests that training and resources for using GenAI should be broadly prioritized, accessible, and not heavily tailored to specific demographic groups. However, the study identified significant concerns within the barriers and challenges factors, including ethical issues, fairness in student assessment, and possible adverse effects on the teacher educator-student relationship. The communication and independence factors highlight a need for professional development, with teacher educators emphasizing the importance of training in GenAI usage to optimize its educational potential. The study concludes that while teacher educators generally support GenAI’s potential benefits, there are essential ethical and practical challenges to address. Recommendations include establishing clear policies and guidelines to guide GenAI implementation and ensure ethical usage. We further recommend the expansion of this research with a larger sample to gather comprehensive insights from the teacher educators and their acceptance levels of GenAI.

CITATION (APA)

Akanzire, B. N., Nyaaba, M., & Nabang, M. (2025). Generative AI in teacher education: Teacher educators’ perception and preparedness. Journal of Digital Educational Technology, 5(1), ep2508. https://doi.org/10.30935/jdet/15887

REFERENCES

  1. Acquah, S., & Nyaaba, M. (2019). Access, use and challenges of adopting TESSA science OER by basic school science teachers in Ghana. European Journal of Research and Reflection in Educational Sciences, 7(12), 1138–1149.
  2. Adarkwah, M. A., Amponsah, S., van Wyk, M. M., Huang, R., Tlili, A., Shehata, B., Metwally, A. H. S., & Wang, H. (2023). Awareness and acceptance of ChatGPT as a generative conversational AI for transforming education by Ghanaian academics: A two-phase study. Journal of Applied Learning and Teaching, 6(2). https://doi.org/10.37074/jalt.2023.6.2.26
  3. Akhtar, N., & Mian, A. (2018). Threat of adversarial attacks on deep learning in computer vision: A survey. IEEE Access, 6, 14410–14430. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2018.2807385
  4. Ali, J. K. M., Shamsan, M. A. A., Hezam, T. A., & Mohammed, A. A. Q. (2023). Impact of ChatGPT on learning motivation: Teachers and students’ voices. Journal of English Studies in Arabia Felix, 2(1), 41–49. https://doi.org/10.56540/jesaf.v2i1.51
  5. Almaraz-Menéndez, F., Maz-Machado, A., López-Esteban, C., & Almaraz-López, C. (2022). Strategy, policy, practice, and governance for AI in higher education institutions. IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-7998-9247-2
  6. Angeli, C., & Valanides, N. (2009). Epistemological and methodological issues for the conceptualization, development, and assessment of ICT-TPCK: Advances in technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPCK). Computers & Education, 52(1), 154–168. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2008.07.006
  7. Baidoo-Anu, D., & Ansah, L. O. (2023). Education in the era of generative artificial intelligence (AI): Understanding the potential benefits of ChatGPT in promoting teaching and learning. Journal of AI, 7(1), 52–62. https://doi.org/10.61969/jai.1337500
  8. Bewersdorff, A., Hartmann, C., Hornberger, M., Seßler, K., Bannert, M., Kasneci, E., Kasneci, G., Zhai, X., & Nerdel, C. (2024). Taking the next step with generative artificial intelligence: The transformative role of multimodal large language models in science education. arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2401.00832
  9. Borenstein, J., & Howard, A. (2021). Emerging challenges in AI and the need for AI ethics education. AI and Ethics, 1, 61–65. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43681-020-00002-7
  10. Brand, D. J. (2023). Ensuring the ethical development and use of AI in local governance. Journal of Ethics & Legal Technologies, 5(2), 95–109.
  11. Cojean, S., Brun, L., Amadieu, F., & Dessus, P. (2023). Teachers’ attitudes towards AI: What is the difference with non-AI technologies? In M. Goldwater, F. K. Anggoro, B. K. Hayes, & D. C. Ong (Eds.), Proceedings of the 45th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 2069–2076).
  12. Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2011). Desining and conducting mixed methods research. SAGE.
  13. Crompton, H., & Burke, D. (2023). Artificial intelligence in higher education: The state of the field. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 20, Article 22. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-023-00392-8
  14. Ertmer, P. A., Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A., & York, C. S. (2006). Exemplary technology-using teachers: Perceptions of factors influencing success. Journal of Computing in Teacher Education, 23(2), 55–61.
  15. Gbemu, L. A., Sarfo, F. K., Adentwi, K. I., & Aklassu-Ganan, E. K. K. (2020). Teacher educators’ self-efficacy beliefs and actual use of ICTs in teaching in the Kumasi Metropolis. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 19(2), 13–23.
  16. Guilherme, A. (2019). AI and education: The importance of teacher and student relations. AI & SOCIETY, 34, 47–54. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-017-0693-8
  17. Hsu, M.-H., Chan, T.-M., & Yu, C.-S. (2023). Termbot: A chatbot-based crossword game for gamified medical terminology learning. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 20(5), Article 4185. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20054185
  18. Huang, F., Wang, Y., & Zhang, H. (2024). Modelling generative AI acceptance, perceived teachers’ enthusiasm and self-efficacy to English as a foreign language learners’ well-being in the digital era. European Journal of Education, 59(4), Article e12770. https://doi.org/10.1111/ejed.12770
  19. Jobin, A., Ienca, M., & Vayena, E. (2019). The global landscape of AI ethics guidelines. Nature Machine Intelligence, 1, 389–399. https://doi.org/10.1038/s42256-019-0088-2
  20. Kohnke, L., Moorhouse, B. L., & Zou, D. (2023). ChatGPT for language teaching and learning. RELC Journal, 54(2), 537–550. https://doi.org/10.1177/00336882231162868
  21. Kooli, C. (2023). Chatbots in education and research: A critical examination of ethical implications and solutions. Sustainability, 15(7), Article 5614. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15075614
  22. Lee, G.-G., Shi, L., Latif, E., Gao, Y., Bewersdorf, A., Nyaaba, M., Guo, S., Wu, Z., Liu, Z., Wang, H., Mai, G., Liu, T., & Zhai, X. (2023). Multimodality of ai for education: Towards artificial general intelligence. arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2312.06037
  23. Lee, Y.-F., Hwang, G.-J., & Chen, P.-Y. (2022). Impacts of an AI-based chabot on college students’ after-class review, academic performance, self-efficacy, learning attitude, and motivation. Educational Technology Research and Development, 70, 1843–1865. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-022-10142-8
  24. MacNeil, S., Tran, A., Mogil, D., Bernstein, S., Ross, E., & Huang, Z. (2022). Generating diverse code explanations using the GPT-3 large language model. In Proceedings of the 2022 ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research-Volume 2 (pp. 37–39). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/3501709.3544280
  25. Markel, J. M., Opferman, S. G., Landay, J. A., & Piech, C. (2023). GPTeach: Interactive TA training with GPT-based students. In Proceedings of the 10th ACM Conference on Learning @ Scale. ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/3573051.3593393
  26. Mogavi, R. H., Deng, C., Kim, J. J., Zhou, P., Kwon, Y. D., Metwally, A. H. S., Tlili, A., Bassanelli, S., Bucchiarone, A., Gujar, S., Nacke, L. E., & Hui, P. (2023). Exploring user perspectives on ChatGPT: Applications, perceptions, and implications for AI-integrated education. arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2305.13114
  27. Natia, J. A., & Al-Hassan, S. (2015). Promoting teaching and learning in Ghanaian basic schools through ICT. International Journal of Education and Development using Information and Communication Technology, 11(2), 113–125.
  28. Nazaretsky, T., Cukurova, M., & Alexandron, G. (2022). An instrument for measuring teachers’ trust in AI-based educational technology. In Proceedings of the 12th International Learning Analytics and Knowledge Conference (pp. 56–66). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/3506860.3506866
  29. Nyaaba, M. (2024a). Driving educational change in Ghana: The potential role of generative AI in promoting practical-based teaching and innovative assessment methods [Paper presentation]. The AERA/TACTL SIG Conference. https://doi.org/10.3102/IP.24.2108011
  30. Nyaaba, M. (2024b). Transforming teacher education in developing countries: The role of generative AI in bridging theory and practice. arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2411.10718
  31. Nyaaba, M., & Sandawey, S. (2021). Challenges and attitude towards blended learning among colleges of education students in Ghana. Journal of Education and Practices, 3(2), 41–47.
  32. Nyaaba, M., & Zhai, X. (2024). Generative AI professional development needs for teacher educators. Journal of AI, 8(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.61969/jai.1385915
  33. Nyaaba, M., & Zhai, X. (2025). Developing custom GPTs for education: Bridging cultural and contextual divide in generative AI [Preprint]. ResearchGate. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.33178.56003
  34. Nyaaba, M., Kyeremeh, P., Majialuwe, E. K., Owusu-Fordjour, C., Asebiga, E., & A-Ingkonge, B. (2024a). Generative AI in academic research: A descriptive study on awareness, gender usage, and views among pre-service teachers. Journal of AI, 8(1), 45–60. https://doi.org/10.61969/jai.1400867
  35. Nyaaba, M., Wright, A., & Choi, G. L. (2024b). Generative AI and digital neocolonialism in global education: Towards an equitable framework. arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2406.02966
  36. Nyaaba, M., Zhai, X., & Faison, M. Z. (2024c). Generative AI for culturally responsive science assessment: A conceptual framework. Education Sciences, 14(12), Article 1325. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14121325
  37. ÓhÉigeartaigh, S. S., Whittlestone, J., Liu, Y., Zeng, Y., & Liu, Z. (2020). Overcoming barriers to cross-cultural cooperation in AI ethics and governance. Philosophy & Technology, 33, 571–593. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-020-00402-x
  38. Quaicoe, J. S., & Pata, K. (2018). Basic school teachers’ perspective to digital teaching and learning in Ghana. Education and Information Technologies, 23, 1159–1173. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-017-9660-8
  39. Rahman, M. M., & Watanobe, Y. (2023). ChatGPT for education and research: Opportunities, threats, and strategies. Applied Sciences, 13(9), Article 5783. https://doi.org/10.3390/app13095783
  40. Sallam, M., Salim, N. A., Barakat, M., & Al-Tammemi, A. B. (2023). ChatGPT applications in medical, dental, pharmacy, and public health education: A descriptive study highlighting the advantages and limitations. Narra J, 3(1), Article e103. https://doi.org/10.52225/narra.v3i1.103
  41. Strubell, E., Ganesh, A., & McCallum, A. (2019). Energy and policy considerations for deep learning in NLP. In A. Korhonen, D. Traum, & L. Marquez (Eds.), Proceedings of the 57th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (pp. 3645–3650). Association for Computational Linguistics. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/P19-1355
  42. Susnjak, T. (2022). ChatGPT: The end of online exam integrity? arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2212.09292
  43. van den Berg, G., & du Plessis, E. (2023). ChatGPT and generative AI: Possibilities for its contribution to lesson planning, critical thinking and openness in teacher education. Education Sciences, 13(10), Article 998. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13100998
  44. Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425–478. https://doi.org/10.2307/30036540
  45. Younes-Aziz, B., & Mouncif, H. (2023). Artificial intelligence system in aid of pedagogical engineering for knowledge assessment on MOOC platforms: Open EdX and Moodle. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 18(5), 144–160. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v18i05.36589
  46. Zhai, X. (2023). ChatGPT and AI: The game changer for education. SSRN. https://ssrn.com/abstract=4389098
  47. Zhai, X. (2024). Transforming teachers’ roles and agencies in the era of generative AI: Perceptions, acceptance, knowledge, and practices. Journal of Science Education and Technology. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-024-10174-0