CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 82Artificial Intelligence in EducationEducational Technology and PedagogyArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education

Pre-service teachers’ attitudes towards artificial intelligence and its integration into EFL teaching and learning

Open access
Pokrivcakova, Silvia·2023·Journal of language and cultural education
DOI 10.2478/jolace-2023-0031
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Abstract Even though artificial intelligence (AI) is no new occurrence, with its beginnings dating back to the 1950s, its use has gained popularity worldwide, especially in recent years, and its presence and importance has grown in many areas of human lives, including education. Surveys conducted internationally have found generally positive attitudes of university students towards artificial intelligence (AI) and its inclusion into various fields of research and study. However, only few research probes have been conducted among students of philology and future language teachers. No such research has been conducted among university students or pre-service EFL teachers in Central Europe. This paper aims to fill this gap in educational research knowledge, as knowing teachers’ and teacher students’ attitudes towards AI can be a key factor in the success or failure of applying AI in education. Therefore, the aim of the study is to determine the level of knowledge and dominant attitudes towards AI in general, AI in learning/teaching EFL and the inclusion of AI in the teacher training curriculum among pre-service EFL teachers in Slovakia. To collect data from the respondents, a cross-sectional survey in the form of a KAP questionnaire was conducted in November-December 2022. 137 pre-service English language teachers responded to a pre-tested online questionnaire consisting of 19 closed-ended (5-point Likert scale) items and one open-ended question. Slovak EFL pre-service teachers were equally interested (38.67%) and uninterested (39.42%) in the ongoing discussion about AI in education. Overall, they self-reported having no (61.31%) or unsatisfactory (21.17%) understanding of the basic computational principles of AI. On the other hand, they were significantly more satisfied with their knowledge of AI-based applications for EFL teaching, which they considered adequate (35.04%). Nevertheless, almost half of the students (45.25%) rated their knowledge as inadequate. It was therefore encouraging to learn that 64.24% of the respondents agreed that AI education should be included in their university curriculum and had predominantly positive expectations of AI and its application in education. 63.50% of them agreed with the statement that AI will improve education in general (compared to only 18.98% who disagreed). They shared a predominantly positive attitude towards the incorporation of AI into EFL and showed their optimistic expectations regarding the impact of AI on teaching and learning English as a foreign language. Slovak EFL pre-service teachers did not express any concerns about the future of their profession. However, a majority of them (53.28%) agreed that EFL teachers might lose some of their skills when using AI in their practice and a significant number (42.33%) feared that AI would make EFL teaching less personal. These findings are consistent with previous research conducted internationally.

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 · 10.2478/jolace-2023-0031

Cites

44 of 44 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?

  • Without positive reinforcement and adequate mentorship from mentor teachers, pre-service teachers may struggle to effectively utilise AI technologies, however high their individual AI literacy and autonomy may be.

    “Without positive reinforcement and adequate mentorship from mentor teachers, PSTs may struggle to effectively utilise AI technologies, however high their individual AI literacy and autonomy may be (Pokrivcakova, 2023).”

    From Mentorship in the Age of Generative AI: ChatGPT to Support Self-Regulated Learning of Pre-Service Teachers Before and During Placements (2025) · cites this paper as Pokrivcakova, 2023

    The RQ3 discussion recommends improving pre-service EFL teachers’ training in the use of AI tools, which supports the general need for guidance. It does not say that reinforcement or mentorship from mentor teachers is necessary, or that pre-service teachers with high AI literacy and autonomy may struggle without it. No page numbers are available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.76)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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: 4

  1. Asmatahasin, M., Pratap, K. V. N. R. et al. (2021). Attitude and Perception of Dental Students towards Artificial Intelligence. Indian Journal of Basic and Applied Medical Research, 10(3), 305 -314. DOI: 10.36848/IJBAMR/2020/29215.557818 · DOI
  2. Cojean, S., Brun, L., Amadieu, F., & Dessus, P. (2023). Teachers' attitudes towards AI: what is the difference with non-AI technologies? Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, 45. https://escholarship.org/uc/item/0r55s1jb
  3. Fernandes, S., Bafna, Y., Patel, C., & Parmar, D. (2022). Knowledge Attitude and Practice of Dental Students Towards Artificial Intelligence (AI): A Questionnaire based Survey. DOI: 10.37896/jxu16.8/029 · DOI
  4. Khanagar S, Alkathiri M, Alhamlan R, Alyami K, Alhejazi M, Alghamdi A. (2021). Knowledge, attitudes, and perceptions of dental students towards artificial intelligence in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Medical Science. 25(114), 1857-67.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Pokrivcakova, S.
Affiliations
University of Trnava , Slovakia
Venue
Journal of language and cultural education
Publisher
Walter de Gruyter GmbH
Published
2023-12-01
Volume
11
Issue
3
Pages
100-114
ISSN
  • 1339-4045 (ISSN-L)
  • 1339-4584
DOI
10.2478/jolace-2023-0031
OpenAlex
W4391663882
Cited by
81
References
44
Citations by year
2026: 32 · 2025: 42 · 2024: 7
FWCI
19.35
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Journal of language and cultural education (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
  • Kultúrna a Edukacná Grantová Agentúra MŠVVaŠ SR
  • Vedecká Grantová Agentúra MŠVVaŠ SR a SAV
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Artificial Intelligence in Education
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Educational Technology and Pedagogy
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
Keywords
artificial intelligence in education, pre-service EFL teachers, teacher attitudes, teacher education curriculum, Slovakia, teacher self-efficacy, Central Europe, English teacher education, teacher concerns

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