CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 28Artificial Intelligence in EducationArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare and EducationEducational Technology and Pedagogy

Artificial intelligence in education: Next-gen teacher perspectives

Open access
National University of Science and Technology Politehnica Bucharest, University Centre Pite?ti, Pite?ti, Romania, Samarescu, Nicoleta, Bumbac, Robert, Bucharest University of Economic Studies, Bucharest, Romania, Zamfiroiu, Alin, Bucharest University of Economic Studies, Bucharest, Romania and National Institute for Research Development in Informatics – ICI Bucharest, Bucharest, Romania, Iorgulescu, Maria-Cristina, Bucharest University of Economic Studies, Bucharest, Romania·2024·Amfiteatru Economic
DOI 10.24818/ea/2024/65/145
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The progress made by artificial intelligence (AI) worldwide has led, through the Beijing Consensus, UNESCO to recommend to governments, in 2019, to include AI in educational policies and processes.While numerous studies inventory students' and teachers' opinions on the use of AI in education (AIEd), this article differs by analysing the factors that influence the behavioural intention to use AI from the training stage of future primary and secondary teachers in Romania.Through exploratory quantitative research, carried out on a sample of 270 students from the Faculty of Education, Social Sciences and Psychology, the interaction of subjects with AI and the intention of integrating AIEd are followed using binary logistic regression.The analysis conducted shows that among the six variables of the model, "the confidence in personal ability to use AI" and "the perception of a greater number of advantages" have a positive and significant impact on the willingness to use AI in the educational process, more than "being previously used", "the knowledge level" or "student requirements".These findings are of particular importance for the revision of teacher training programmes and the development of educational policies that increase the confidence of future teachers in the ability to use AI, eliminating fears or misconceptions about AI.

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 · 10.24818/ea/2024/65/145

Cites

32 of 32 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?

  • Generative AI can help boost self-efficacy for pre-service teachers by providing tools that allow for a more tailored and responsive learning experience.

    “Other studies have also suggested that gen-AI can help boost self-efficacy for PSTs by providing them with tools that allow for a more tailored and responsive learning experience (Ayanwale et al., 2024; A.-C. E. Ding et al., 2024; Samarescu et al., 2024; Sanusi et al., 2024).”

    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 Samarescu et al., 2024

    The Conclusions say AI can support personalised learning experiences and provide future teachers with real-time teaching suggestions. They describe teachers’ confidence in using AI as a predictor of their intention to use it, not as an outcome increased by generative AI or tailored learning tools. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Pre-service teachers with higher AI literacy tend to demonstrate a higher level of autonomy in decision-making regarding how to utilise AI tools effectively.

    “PSTs with higher AI literacy tend to demonstrate a higher level of autonomy in decision-making regarding how to utilise AI tools effectively (Karahan, 2023; Samarescu et al., 2024).”

    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 Samarescu et al., 2024

    The results section (‘Source: The authors’ own calculations’; page unavailable) examines knowledge of AI and willingness to use it, finding no positive effect of knowledge on that willingness. The paper does not assess whether pre-service teachers with higher AI literacy have greater autonomy in deciding how to use AI tools (searched: autonomy, decision-making, AI literacy). Willingness to use AI is not the same outcome as decision-making autonomy. (LLM, conf=0.74)

    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: 7

  1. Bell, J. and Waters, S., 2018. Doing your research project. New York: McGraw-Hill. Challenges for Competence-Oriented Education in the Context of the Development of Artificial Intelligence Systems AE Vol. 26 • No. 65 • February 2024 159
  2. Kairu, C., 2023. Students' Attitude Towards the Use of Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning to Measure Classroom Engagement Activities. In: Proceedings of EdMedia + Innovate Learning. [online] The Netherlands: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). pp. 793-802. Available at: <https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/217382/> [Accessed 15 July 2023].
  3. Kaplan-Rakowski, R., Grotewold, K., Hartwick, P. and Papin, K., 2023. Generative AI and Teachers' Perspectives on Its Implementation in Education. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 34(2), pp. 313-338.
  4. Limna, P., Kraiwanit, T. and Jangjarat, K., 2023. Adopting the technology acceptance model (TAM) to explore online purchase intention via Facebook live streaming: Empirical evidence from Bangkok, Thailand. ASEAN Journal of Management & Innovation, 10(1), pp. 1-13.
  5. McCarthy, J., 1998. What is artificial intelligence. [online] Available at: <https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:261070249> [Accessed 12 June 2023].
  6. Moorhouse, B. and Kohnke, L., 2023. The Effects of Generative Ai on Initial Language Teacher Education: The Perspectives of Teacher Educators. [online] SSRN. Available at: <https://ssrn.com/abstract=4532479> [Accessed 16 August 2023].
  7. UNESCO, 2019b. Beijing Consensus on Artificial Intelligence and Education, Outcome document of the International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Education 'Planning education in the AI era: Lead the leap. [online] Available at: <https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ ark:/48223/pf0000368303> [Accessed 12 May 2023].

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
National University of Science and Technology Politehnica Bucharest, U. C. P., Samarescu, N., Bumbac, R., Bucharest University of Economic Studies, B., Zamfiroiu, A., Bucharest University of Economic Studies, B., Iorgulescu, M.-C., & Bucharest University of Economic Studies, B.
Affiliations
  • National Institute for Research and Development in Informatics - ICI Bucharest (RO)
  • University of Pitesti (RO)
ORCID
Venue
Amfiteatru Economic
Publisher
Bucharest University of Economic Studies
Published
2024-02
Volume
26
Issue
65
Pages
145
ISSN
  • 1582-9146 (ISSN-L)
  • 2247-9104
DOI
10.24818/ea/2024/65/145
OpenAlex
W4391933969
Cited by
28
References
32
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 5
FWCI
10.53
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Amfiteatru Economic (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • Econstor (Econstor) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
  • Greater South Information System
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Artificial Intelligence in Education
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Educational Technology and Pedagogy
Keywords
artificial intelligence in education, teacher perceptions, behavioral intention, pre-service teachers, teacher professional development, AI confidence, education policy, K-12 education, Romania

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