Teachers’ technopedagogical competence and perspectives on artificial intelligence use in education

Abstract

Digitalization has made technology-supported materials essential, yet their practical use remains inefficient. This study investigates the link between teachers’ technopedagogical competencies and their perspectives on integrating artificial intelligence (AI) into education. Using an explanatory sequential mixed-methods approach, research was conducted with 297 teachers in Gaziantep during the 2024–2025 academic year. Quantitative data was collected via an Intelligent TPACK framework scale, while qualitative insights were gathered through semi-structured interviews with 10 participants. Data analysis included t-tests, ANOVA, Scheffé post hoc tests, and content analysis. Results indicate that teachers' AI-related technopedagogical skills are at a low-to-moderate level. While gender showed no significant difference, variables such as age, seniority and prior experience with Web 2.0 or AI tools caused notable differences. Qualitatively, teachers reported using AI for instructional design, assessment efficiency, and professional development. However, concerns were raised regarding data security, overreliance, and the lack of emotional depth in AI interactions. Ultimately, the study concludes that AI should serve as a complementary tool rather than a replacement for teachers.

Keywords

• AI tools
• use of AI in education
• teacher perspectives

References

1. Afshari, M., Bakar, K. A., Luan, W. S., Samah, B. A., & Fooi, F. S. (2008). Factors affecting teachers’ use of information and communication technology. International Journal of Instruction, 2(1), 77–104.
2. Aktas, M. (2022). Dördüncü sanayi devrimi, YZ ve mesleklerin geleceği [Fourth industrial revolution, AI and the future of professions]. International Social Sciences Studies Journal, 8(105), 4357–4368. https://doi.org/10.29228/sssj.66927
3. Akturk, A. O., & Delen, E. (2020). Öğretmenlerin teknoloji kabul düzeyleri ile öz-yeterlik inançları arasındaki ilişki [The relationship between teachers' technology acceptance levels and self-efficacy beliefs]. Mersin Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 16(1), 145–161.
4. Baek, Y. G., Jong, J., & Kim, B. (2008). What makes teachers use technology in the classroom? Exploring the factors affecting facilitators and inhibitors of technology integration. Computers & Education, 50(4), 1329–1341. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2006.05.002
5. Bayne, S. (2015). Teacherbot: Interventions in automated teaching. Teaching in Higher Education, 20(4), 455–467. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2015.1020783
6. Bodo, B., Helberger, N., & de Vreese, C. H. (2017). Political micro-targeting: A manchurian candidate or just a dark horse? Internet Policy Review, 6(4). https://doi.org/10.14763/2017.4.776
7. Bostrom, N. (2006). How long before superintelligence? Linguistic and Philosophical Investigations, 5(1), 11–30.
8. Bryman, A. (2012). Social research methods (4th ed.). Oxford University Press.

9. Buttazzo, G. (2023). Rise of artificial general intelligence: Risks and opportunities. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence, 6, Article 1226990. https://doi.org/10.3389/frai.2023.1226990
10. Caliskan, S., Guney, Z., Sakhieva, R., Vasbieva, D., & Zaitseva, N. (2019). Teachers’ views on the availability of Web 2.0 tools in education. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 14(22), 70–81. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v14i22.11751
11. Celik, I. (2023a). Towards Intelligent-TPACK: An empirical study on teachers’ professional knowledge to ethically integrate artificial intelligence (AI)-based tools into education. Computers in Human Behavior, 138, Article 107468. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2022.107468
12. Celik, I. (2023b). Towards formulation of a comprehensive framework for artificial intelligence literacy in teacher education. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 4, Article 100140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2023.100140
13. Celik, I., Dindar, M., Muukkonen, H., & Järvelä, S. (2022). The promises and challenges of artificial intelligence for teachers: A systematic review of research. TechTrends, 66(4), 616–630. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-022-00715-y
14. Chai, C. S., Chiu, T. K., & Lin, X. (2023). Integrating artificial intelligence into TPACK: Designing iTPACK for future-ready educators. British Journal of Educational Technology, 54(5), 1120–1138. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13323
15. Chan, C. K. Y., & Lee, K. K. W. (2023). The AI generation gap: Are gen z students more interested in adopting generative AI such as ChatGPT in teaching and learning than their gen x and millennial generation teachers? Smart Learning Environments, 10(1), Article 60. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-023-00269-3
16. Chan, C. K. Y., & Louisa, T. H. Y. (2023). The AI revolution in education: Will AI replace or assist teachers in higher education? arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2305.01185
17. Chen, L., Chen, P., & Lin, Z. (2020). Artificial intelligence in education: A review. IEEE Access, 8, 75264–75278. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2020.2988510
18. Chounta, I. A., Bardone, E., Raudsep, A., & Pedaste, M. (2022). Exploring teachers’ perceptions of artificial intelligence as a tool to support their practice in Estonian K-12 education. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 32(3), 725–755. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-021-00243-5
19. Copeland, J. (1998). Artificial intelligence: A philosophical introduction. Blackwell.
20. Crawford, J., Cowling, M., & Allen, K.-A. (2024). Maintaining human control, creativity, and critical analysis in the learning process with AI. Frontiers in Education, 9, Article 1384025. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2024.1384025
21. Creswell, J. W., & Clark, V. L. P. (2007). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Sage Publications.
22. Dawadi, S., Shrestha, S., & Giri, R. A. (2021). Mixed-methods research: A discussion on its types, challenges, and criticisms. Journal of Practical Studies in Education, 2(2), 25–36. https://doi.org/10.46809/jpse.v2i2.20
23. DeVellis, R. F., & Thorpe, C. T. (2021). Scale development: Theory and applications (5th ed.). Sage Publications.
24. Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and education: An introduction to the philosophy of education. Pennsylvania State University.
25. Digital Education Council. (2026). Resistance to AI: Are older faculty really a problem? DEC Insights. https://www.digitaleducationcouncil.com/insights
26. Dishon, G. (2017). New data, old tensions: Big data, personalized learning, and the challenges of progressive education. Theory and Research in Education, 15(3), 272–289. https://doi.org/10.1177/1477878517735233
27. Farah, A. (2012). Factors influencing teachers' technology self-efficacy: A case study [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Liberty University.
28. Firmin, M. W., & Genesi, D. J. (2013). History and implementation of classroom technology. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 93, 1603–1617. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.10.089
29. Freire, P. (1978). Pedagogy of the oppressed. Routledge. (Original work published 1970). https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429339530
30. Gerlich, M. (2025). AI tools in society: Impacts on cognitive offloading and the future of critical thinking. Societies, 15(1), Article 6. https://doi.org/10.3390/soc15010006
31. Görgülü, D., & Küçükali, R. (2018). Öğretmenlerin teknolojik liderlik özyeterliklerinin incelenmesi [Examination of teachers' technological leadership self efficacy]. Uluslararası Liderlik Çalışmaları Dergisi: Kuram ve Uygulama, 1(1), 1–12.
32. Gottfredson, L. S. (1997). Mainstream science on intelligence: An editorial with 52 signatories, history and bibliography. Ablex.
33. Guillén Gámez, F. D., Mayorga Fernández, M. J., Bravo Agapito, J., & Ortega Muñoz, D. (2021). Analysis of teachers’ pedagogical digital competence: Identification of factors predicting their acquisition. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 26(3), 481–498. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-019-09432-7
34. Hava, K., & Babayiğit, Ö. (2025). Exploring the relationship between teachers’ competencies in AI-TPACK and digital proficiency. Education and Information Technologies, 30(3), 3491–3508. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-12939-x
35. Heffernan, N. T., & Heffernan, C. L. (2014). The ASSISTments ecosystem: Building a platform that brings scientists and teachers together for minimally invasive research on human learning and teaching. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 24(4), 470–497. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-014-0024-x
36. Hertz, M. B. (2024). Using AI effectively for lesson planning. Edutopia. https://www.edutopia.org/article/using-ai-effectively-lesson-planning
37. Humble, N., & Mozelius, P. (2019). Teacher-supported AI or AI-supported teachers. In European Conference on the Impact of Artificial Intelligence and Robotics (pp. 157–164). Academic Conferences and Publishing International.
38. Hussein, A., Daher, W., & Assali, A. (2026). Primary school teachers' I-TPACK competencies after Gemini-based professional development. Frontiers in Education, 11, Article 1800871. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2026.1800871
39. Hussein, E., Hussein, M., & Al-Hendawi, M. (2025). Investigation into the applications of artificial intelligence (AI) in special education: A literature review. Social Sciences, 14(5), Article 288. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci14050288
40. Hwang, G. J., Xie, H., Wah, B. W., & Gašević, D. (2020). Vision, challenges, roles and research issues of artificial intelligence in education. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 1, Article 100001. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2020.100001
41. Kaya, B. N. (2023). YZ tabanlı dil modelleri ile ilgili öğretmen görüşlerinin incelenmesi [Investigation of teachers' views on AI-based language models] [Unpublished master's thesis]. Düzce University.
42. Khlaif, Z. N. (2018). Factors influencing teachers’ attitudes toward mobile technology integration in K-12. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 23(1), 161–175. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-017-9311-x
43. Koehler, M. J., & Mishra, P. (2009). What is technological pedagogical content knowledge? Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 9(1), 60–70.
44. McCarthy, J. (2004). What is artificial intelligence? Stanford University. http://jmc.stanford.edu/articles/whatisai/whatisai.pdf
45. Meco, G., & Costu, F. (2022). Eğitimde YZ’nin kullanılması: Betimsel içerik analizi çalışması [The use of AI in education: A descriptive content analysis study]. Karadeniz Teknik Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 12(23), 171–193.
46. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.). Sage Publications.
47. Moore-Hayes, C. (2011). Technology integration preparedness and its influence on teacher efficacy. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology, 37(3), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.21432/T2B597
48. Mujiono, M. (2023). The role of teachers in the era of artificial intelligence: A systematic literature review. Journal of Educational Technology and Inventions, 2(1), 45–56. https://doi.org/10.56442/jeti.v2i1.132
49. Nabiyev, V. V. (2012). Yapay zekâ: İnsan-bilgisayar etkileşimi [Artificial intelligence: Human-computer interaction]. Seçkin Yayıncılık.
50. Nasrin, & Islahi, F. (2019). Exploring teacher attitude towards information technology with a gender perspective. Contemporary Educational Technology, 10(1), 37–54. https://doi.org/10.30935/cet.512527
51. Nwana, H. S. (1990). Intelligent tutoring systems: An overview. Artificial Intelligence Review, 4(4), 251–277. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00168958
52. Obschonka, M., & Audretsch, D. B. (2020). Artificial intelligence and big data entrepreneurship: A new era has begun. Small Business Economics, 55(3), 529–539. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-019-00202-4
53. OECD. (2015). Students, computers and learning: Making the connection. PISA, OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264239555
54. Qiu, Y. (2020). Education informationization. In Proceedings of the 2020 6th International Conference on Education and Training Technologies (pp. 40–43). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/3399971.3399978
55. Roll, I., & Wylie, R. (2016). Evolution and revolution in artificial intelligence in education. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 26(2), 582–599. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-016-0110-3
56. Saribas, S., & Babadag, G. (2015). Temel eğitimin temel sorunları [Basic problems of basic education]. Anadolu Eğitim Liderliği ve Öğretim Dergisi, 3(1), 18–34.
57. Sariel, S. (2017). Günümüzde yapay zekâ [Artificial intelligence today]. In M. Karaca (Ed.), İnsanlaşan makineler ve yapay zekâ [Humanizing machines and artificial intelligence] (pp. 21–25). İstanbul Technical University.
58. Schwab, K. (2018). Dördüncü sanayi devrimi [The fourth industrial revolution] (Z. Dicleli, Trans.). Optimist. (Original work published 2016).
59. Shin, W. S. (2015). Teachers’ use of technology and its influencing factors in Korean elementary schools. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 24(4), 461–476. https://doi.org/10.1080/1475939X.2014.915229
60. Sırakaya, M. (2019). Technology acceptance of primary and secondary school teachers. Inonu University Journal of the Faculty of Education, 20(2), 578–590. https://doi.org/10.17679/inuefd.495886
61. Smerdon, B., Cronen, S., Lanahan, L., Anderson, J., Iannotti, N., & Angeles, J. (2000). Teachers' tools for the 21st century: A report on teachers' use of technology. National Center for Education Statistics.
62. Stergaki, C., Kougiourouki, M., & Passa, E. (2025). The contribution of eTwinning projects to the development of students’ linguistic, communicative, and collaborative skills in primary education: Teachers’ perspectives. European Journal of Education and Pedagogy, 6(2), 78–84. https://doi.org/10.24018/ejedu.2025.6.2.945
63. Terrell, S. (2012). Mixed-methods research methodologies. The Qualitative Report, 17(1), 254–280. http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR17-1/terrell.pdf
64. Tuğluk, M. N., & Gök-Çolak, F. (2019). Sanayi toplumu ve eğitimi [Industrial society and education]. In A. D. Öğretir-Özçelik & M. N. Tuğluk (Eds.), Eğitimde ve endüstride 21. yüzyıl becerileri [21st century skills in education and industry] (pp. 305–335). Pegem Akademi.
65. UNESCO. (2020). Education: The key to a sustainable future. UNESCO.
66. United Nations Office for West Africa and the Sahel (UNOWA). (2026). AI reducing teacher workload: Case studies. UNOWA Blog. https://unowas.unmissions.org/blog
67. Yan, L., Sha, L., Zhao, L., Li, Q., Martinez-Maldonado, R., Chen, G., Roscoe, R., Firestone, A., Solyst, J., Lu, X., Zhu, M., Kim, J. H., Liu, R., Bodily, R., Hance, M., Holmes, W., & Gašević, D. (2024). Practical and ethical challenges of large language models in education: A systematic scoping review. British Journal of Educational Technology, 55(1), 90–112. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13370