CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 55

Revolutionizing EFL special education: how ChatGPT is transforming the way teachers approach language learning

Alenezi, Mogbel Aid K., Mohamed, Amr M., Shaaban, Tahany S.·2023·Innoeduca. International Journal of Technology and Educational Innovation
DOI 10.24310/innoeduca.2023.v9i2.16774
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

This mixed-methods study explored the attitudes of 199 English as a Foreign Language (EFL) special education teachers towards using ChatGPT for language learning. The survey questionnaire, consisting of 21 items, examined attitudes, effectiveness, barriers, and the future use of ChatGPT. The results revealed that participants held moderate attitudes, perceiving ChatGPT as moderately effective with moderate barriers. While no significant differences were found between male and female teachers in attitudes and effectiveness, significant gender differences emerged in the future use of ChatGPT, with female teachers exhibiting a greater willingness to embrace it. Follow-up email interviews with five participants provided valuable insights into strategies, effectiveness, challenges, and inclusivity when using ChatGPT in language instruction for special education students. These findings contribute to implementing and developing ChatGPT as a language learning tool for EFL special education students, emphasizing the importance of gender-inclusive approaches and practical considerations to enhance its efficacy.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.24310/innoeduca.2023.v9i2.16774

Cites

7 of 7 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • GenAI can cater to special education requirements, enhancing inclusivity.

    “Alenizi et al.'s (2023) and De Vargas et al.'s (2024) studies demonstrate how GenAI can cater to special education requirements, enhancing inclusivity.”

    From Generative AI in Language Education: Bridging Divide and Fostering Inclusivity (2025) · cites this paper as Alenizi et al., 2023

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 36

  1. Alam, A. (2021, December). Should robots replace teachers? Mo- bilisation of AI and learning analytics in education. In 2021 In- ternational Conference on Advances in Computing, Commu- nication, and Control (ICAC3) (pp. 1-12). IEEE. http://dx.doi. org/10.1109/ICAC353642.2021.9697300 · DOI
  2. Alcorn, A., Ainger, E., Charisi, V., Mantinioti, S., Petrović, S., Schadenberg, B., Tavassoli, T., & Pellicano, E. (2019). Educa- tors' views on using humanoid robots with autistic learners in special education settings in England. Frontiers in Robotics and AI, 6, e107. https://doi.org/10.3389/frobt.2019.00107 · DOI
  3. Al-khresheh, M., Mohamed, A., & Asif, M. (2022). Teachers' Per- spectives towards Online Professional Development Pro- grams during the Period of COVID-19 Pandemic in the Saudi EFL Context. FWU Journal of Social Sciences, 16(2). http://doi. org/10.51709/19951272/Summer2022/1 · DOI
  4. Artiles, J., Guerra, M., Aguiar, M. V., & Rodríguez, J. (2021). Embodied conversational agents: artificial intelligence for autonomous learning. Pixel-Bit. Revista De Medios Y Innoeduca. International Journal of Technology and Educational Innovation
  5. Alenizi, M. A. K., Mohamed, Amr M., Shaaban, T. S. Educación, (62), 107-144. https://doi.org/10.12795/pixel- bit.86171 · DOI
  6. Awada, G. (2022). Robotics and Weblog integration into EFL curriculum of middle and secondary schools: Explorato- ry study. Language Teaching Research, 0(0). https://doi. org/10.1177/13621688221091611 · DOI
  7. Babitha, M. M., & Sushma, C. (2022). Trends of Artificial Intelli- gence for online exams in Education. International journal of Early Childhood special Education, 14(01), 2457-2463. https://doi.org/10.9756/INT-JECSE/V14I1.290 · DOI
  8. Bingimlas, K. A. (2009). Barriers to the successful integration of ICT in teaching and learning environments: A review of the literature. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, science and tech- nology education, 5(3), 235-245. https://doi.org/10.12973/ ejmste/75275 · DOI · Paper page
  9. Cagiltay, K., Cakir, H., Karasu, N., Islim, O. F., & Cicek, F. (2019). Use of educational technology in special education: Perceptions of teachers. Participatory Educational Research, 6(2), 189- 205. https://doi.org/10.17275/per.19.21.6.2 · DOI
  10. Castillo, D., Canhoto, A., & Said, E. (2021). The dark side of AI-pow- ered service interactions: Exploring the process of co-de- struction from the customer perspective. The Service Indus- tries Journal, 41(13-14), 900-925. https://doi.org/10.1080/026 42069.2020.1787993 · DOI
  11. Cheah, C. W. (2021). Developing a gamified AI-enabled on- line learning application to improve students' percep- tion of university physics. Computers and Education: Ar- tificial Intelligence, 2, e100032. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. caeai.2021.100032 · DOI
  12. Chen, X., Zou, D., Xie, H., Cheng, G., & Liu, C. (2022). Two Decades of Artificial Intelligence in Education: Contributors, Collabo- rations, Research Topics, Challenges, and Future Directions. Educational Technology & Society, 25(1), 28-47.
  13. Cheng, S. C., & Lai, C. L. (2020). Facilitating learning for students with special needs: a review of technology-supported special education studies. Journal of computers in education, 7(2), 131-153. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40692-019-00150-8 · DOI
  14. Choi, J., & Yi, Y. (2016). Teachers' integration of multimodality into classroom practices for English language learners. Tesol Jour- nal, 7(2), 304-327. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesj.204 · DOI
  15. Dignum, V. (2018). Ethics in artificial intelligence: introduction to the special issue. Ethics and Information Technology, 20(1), 1-3. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-018-9450-z · DOI
  16. Edwards, B., & Cheok, A. (2018). Why not robot teachers: artificial intelligence for addressing teacher shortage. Applied Artificial Intelligence, 32(4), 345-360. https://doi.org/10.1080/0883951 4.2018.1464286 · DOI
  17. Florian, L., & Linklater, H. (2010). Preparing teachers for inclusive education: using inclusive pedagogy to enhance teaching and learning for all. Cambridge journal of education, 40(4), 369-386. https://doi.org/10.1080/0305764X.2010.526588 · DOI
  18. García Aguilera, F. & Aguilar Cuenca, D. (2022). ICT as a strategy for social inclusion. Analysis of a second educational op- portunity track. Innoeduca. International Journal of Technol- ogy and Educational Innovation, 8(1), 121-134. https://doi. org/10.24310/innoeduca.2022.v8i1.11467 · DOI
  19. Hopcan, S., Polat, E., Ozturk, M., & Ozturk, L. (2022). Artificial in- telligence in special education: a systematic review. Interac- tive Learning Environments. https://doi.org/10.1080/1049482 0.2022.2067186 · DOI
  20. Johnson, B., & Turner, L. (2003). Data collection strategies in mixed methods research. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social and Behavioral Research (pp. 297-320). Sage.
  21. Losen, D., & Welner, K. (2001). Disabling discrimination in our public schools: Comprehensive legal challenges to inappro- priate and inadequate special education services for minor- ity children. Harvard Civil Rights-Civil Liberties Law Review, 36(2), 407-460.
  22. Lu, J., Jiang, H., & Huang, Y. (2022). Inclusive EFL Teaching for Young Students with Special Needs: A Case in China. Chil- dren, 9(5), e749. https://doi.org/10.3390/children9050749 · DOI
  23. Miranda, J., Wells, J., & Jenkins, A. (2019). Preparing special education teacher candidates to teach English language learners with disabilities: How well are we doing? Lan- guage Teaching Research, 23(3), 330-351. https://doi. org/10.1177/1362168817730665 · DOI
  24. Innoeduca. International Journal of Technology and Educational Innovation
  25. Alenizi, M. A. K., Mohamed, Amr M., Shaaban, T. S. Mohamed, A. (2023). Exploring the Potential of an AI-based Chat- bot (ChatGPT) in Enhancing English as a Foreign Language (EFL) Teaching: Perceptions of EFL Faculty Members. Educa- tion and Information Technologies. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s10639-023-11917-z. · DOI · Paper page
  26. Muñoz, S., Gayoso, G., Huambo, A., Tapia, R., Incaluque, J. L., Pon- go, O. E., Ramírez, J.C., Reyes, J.E., Huaranga, H.V., & Arias, J. L. (2023). Examining the Impacts of ChatGPT on Student Moti- vation and Engagement. Social Space, 23(1), 1-27.
  27. Nazaretsky, T., Ariely, M., Cukurova, M., & Alexandron, G. (2022). Teachers' trust in AI powered educational technology and a professional development program to improve it. British Journal of educational technology, 53(4), 914-931. https://doi. org/10.1111/bjet.13232 · DOI · Paper page
  28. Paju, B., Räty, L., Pirttimaa, R., & Kontu, E. (2016). The school staff's perception of their ability to teach special education- al needs pupils in inclusive settings in Finland. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 20(8), 801-815. https://doi.org /10.1080/13603116.2015.1074731 · DOI
  29. Pokrivčáková, S. (2019). Preparing teachers for the application of AI-powered technologies in foreign language education. Journal of Language and Cultural Education, 7(3), 135-153. https://doi.org/10.2478/jolace-2019-0025 · DOI · Paper page
  30. Qasem, F., Ghaleb, M., Mahdi, H. S., Al Khateeb, A., & Al Fadda, H. (2023). Dialog chatbot as an interactive online tool in en- hancing ESP vocabulary learning. Saudi Journal of Language Studies. https://doi.org/10.1108/SJLS-10-2022-0072 · DOI
  31. Rezaee, A., & Shabani, E. (2019). Self-and Peer-Assessments in the Iranian Context: A Systematic Review. In C. Denman & R. Al-Mahrooqi (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Curriculum Re- form Initiatives in English Education (pp. 270-282). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-5225-5846-0. · DOI
  32. ch016 · DOI
  33. Shaaban, T., & Mohamed, A. (2023). Exploring the effectiveness of augmented reality technology on reading comprehension skills among early childhood pupils with learning disabilities. Journal of Computers in Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s40692-023-00269-9 · DOI
  34. Şimşek, A. S., & Ateş, H. (2022). The extended technology ac- ceptance model for Web 2.0 technologies in teaching. Inno- educa. International Journal of Technology and Educational Innovation, 8(2), 165-183. https://doi.org/10.24310/innoedu- ca.2022.v8i2.15413 · DOI
  35. Tomczyk, Ł., Mascia, M., Gierszewski, D., & Walker, C. (2023). Barri- ers to digital inclusion among older people: a intergeneration- al reflection on the need to develop digital competences for the group with the highest level of digital exclusion. Innoedu- ca. International Journal of Technology and Educational Inno- vation, 9(1), 5-26. https://doi.org/10.24310/innoeduca.2023. v9i1.16433 · DOI
  36. Xie, H., Chu, H., Hwang, G., & Wang, C. (2019). Trends and develop- ment in technology-enhanced adaptive/personalized learn- ing: A systematic review of journal publications from 2007 to 2017. Computers & Education, 140, e103599. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103599 · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Alenezi, M. A. K., Mohamed, A. M., & Shaaban, T. S.
ORCID
Venue
Innoeduca. International Journal of Technology and Educational Innovation
Publisher
Malaga University
Published
2023-12-01
Volume
9
Issue
2
Pages
5-23
ISSN
2444-2925
DOI
10.24310/innoeduca.2023.v9i2.16774
Cited by
55
References
7
Licence
creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0 (unspecified)

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review