Türk İngilizce Öğretmen Adaylarının Yapay Zeka Okuryazarlığının Araştırılması

Öz

Bu çalışma, İngilizce öğretmen adaylarının (EFL) yapay zekâ okuryazarlık düzeylerini incelemekte ve yapay zekâ okuryazarlığının demografik değişkenler (yaş, cinsiyet, sınıf düzeyi), eğitim türü (informal/formal) ve kullanım örüntüleri (yapay zekâ araçlarını kullanma sıklığı ve kullanılan araç türleri) açısından farklılaşıp farklılaşmadığını araştırmaktadır. Nicel ve kesitsel tarama deseni kullanılan araştırma, 2024–2025 eğitim-öğretim yılının bahar döneminde Türkiye’deki bir devlet üniversitesinde öğrenim gören 211 İngilizce öğretmen adayı ile yürütülmüştür. Veriler, Laupichler ve arkadaşları (2023) tarafından geliştirilen ve Deveci Topal ve arkadaşları (2025) tarafından Türkçeye uyarlanan Yapay Zekâ Okuryazarlığı Ölçeği (AILS) aracılığıyla toplanmıştır. Bulgular, katılımcıların orta-yüksek düzeyde yapay zekâ okuryazarlığına sahip olduklarını; en yüksek puanların Eleştirel Değerlendirme, orta düzey puanların Uygulamalı Kullanım, en düşük puanların ise Teknik Anlayış boyutlarında elde edildiğini göstermiştir. Yapay zekâ okuryazarlığı açısından demografik değişkenler (yaş, cinsiyet, sınıf düzeyi) ve eğitim türü (informal/formal) bakımından istatistiksel olarak anlamlı bir farklılık bulunmamıştır. Buna karşın, bireysel olarak çalışan ya da YouTube videoları/web seminerleri aracılığıyla öğrenme gerçekleştiren katılımcıların, diğerlerine kıyasla anlamlı düzeyde daha yüksek yapay zekâ okuryazarlığına sahip oldukları belirlenmiştir. Yapay zekâ kullanım sıklığı açısından gruplar arasında anlamlı bir farklılık saptanmamıştır. Kullanılan yapay zekâ araçları açısından ise yazma asistanlarını kullanan katılımcıların yapay zekâ okuryazarlık düzeylerinin diğerlerine göre daha yüksek olduğu görülmüştür. Araştırma sonuçları, bazı informal öğrenme biçimleri ve belirli yapay zekâ araç türlerinin daha yüksek yapay zekâ okuryazarlığı ile ilişkili olduğunu göstermektedir. Bu nedenle, gelecekte yapılacak çalışmaların bu değişkenlere odaklanması önerilmektedir. Ayrıca, daha büyük ya da daha dengeli örneklemlerle yürütülecek çalışmaların, demografik değişkenler, formal eğitim ve yapay zekâ kullanım sıklığı açısından farklı sonuçlar ortaya koyabileceği düşünülmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• YZ
• YZ Okuryazarlığı
• Yapay zeka
• İngilizce öğretmen adayları

Investigating AI Literacy of Turkish Pre-Service EFL Teachers

Öz

This study investigates the AI literacy of pre-service EFL teachers and examines whether AI literacy differs across demographic factors (age, gender, grade level), training (informal/formal), and usage patterns (frequency and types of AI tools). Employing a quantitative, cross-sectional survey design, the study was conducted during the spring semester of the 2024–2025 academic year with 211 pre-service EFL teachers from a state university in Türkiye. Data were collected via the Turkish adaptation of the Artificial Intelligence Literacy Scale (AILS), developed by Laupichler et al. (2023) and translated by Deveci Topal et al. (2025). The findings revealed that participants had moderate to high AI literacy, with the highest scores in Critical Appraisal, moderate scores in Practical Applications, and the lowest scores in Technical Understanding. No statistical significant differences were found in AI literacy across demographic factors (age, gender, grade level) and training (informal/formal). However, participants who self-studied or engaged with YouTube videos/webinars showed significantly higher AI literacy than their counterparts. Regarding the frequency of using AI, no significant difference was found between the different groups. Regarding AI tools, participants who used writing assistants had higher AI literacy than their counterparts. The study indicates that certain informal training and AI tool types are associated with higher AI literacy; therefore, future studies should focus on these variables. Additionally, future studies with larger or more balanced samples can find different results for demographic factors, formal training, and frequency of AI use.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• AI
• AI literacy
• Artificial intelligence
• Pre-service EFL teachers

Kaynakça

1. Ayanwale, M. A., Adelana, O. P., Molefi, R. R., Adeeko, O., & Ishola, A. M. (2024). Examining artificial intelligence literacy among pre-service teachers for future classrooms. Computers and Education Open, 6, 100179. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeo.2024.100179
2. Brown, R., Sillence, E., & Branley-Bell, D. (2025). AcademAI: Investigating AI usage, attitudes, and literacy in higher education and research. Journal of Educational Technology Systems. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/00472395251347304
3. Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). SAGE Publications, Inc.
4. Çelebi, C., Yılmaz, F., Demir, U., & Karakuş, F. (2023). Artificial intelligence literacy: An adaptation study. Instructional Technology and Lifelong Learning, 4(2), 291–306. https://doi.org/10.52911/itall.1401740
5. Demir, B. (2025). Introduction to Artificial Intelligence in academic research [Online module]. In Using Artificial Intelligence for Academic Research. Çanakkale OnSekiz Mart University. https://esertifika.comu.edu.tr/tr/sertifika/using-artificial-intelligence-for-academic-research-471
6. Deveci Topal, A., Toker Gökçe, A., Eren, C. D., & Kolburan Geçer, A. (2025). Artificial intelligence literacy scale: A study of reliability and validity in Turkish university students. Journal of Learning and Teaching in Digital Age, 10(1), 58–67. https://doi.org/10.53850/joltida.1440845
7. Fathi, J., Rahimi, M., & Derakhshan, A. (2024). Improving EFL learners’ speaking skills and willingness to communicate via artificial intelligence-mediated interactions. System, 121, 103254. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2024.103254
8. Gayed, J. M., Carlon, M. K. J., Oriola, A. M., & Cross, J. S. (2022). Exploring an AI-based writing assistant's impact on English language learners. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 3, 100055. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2022.100055

9. Golzar, J., Noor, S., & Tajik, O. (2022). Convenience sampling. International Journal of Education & Language Studies, 1(2), 72–77. https://doi.org/10.22034/ijels.2022.162981
10. Hornberger, M., Bewersdorff, A., Schiff, D. S., & Nerdel, C. (2025). A multinational assessment of AI literacy among university students in Germany, the UK, and the US. Computers in Human Behavior: Artificial Humans, 4, Article 100132. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chbah.2025.100132
11. Hossain, Z., Çelik, Ö., & Hınız, G. (2025). Exploring EFL students’ AI literacy in academic writing: Insights into familiarity, knowledge and ethical perceptions. Journal of Theoretical Educational Science, 18(1), 157–181. https://doi.org/10.30831/akukeg.1538011
12. Jeon, J. (2022). Exploring a self-directed interactive app for informal EFL learning: a self-determination theory perspective. Education and Information Technologies, 27(4), 5767-5787. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10839-y
13. Koç, F. Ş. (2024). The development of listening and speaking skills in EFL via an artificially intelligent chatbot application: A quasi-experimental design study (Doctoral dissertation, Middle East Technical University). https://hdl.handle.net/11511/107856
14. Laupichler, M. C., Aster, A., Haverkamp, N., & Raupach, T. (2023a). Development of the “Scale for the Assessment of Non-Experts’ AI Literacy” – An exploratory factor analysis. Computers in Human Behavior Reports, 12, Article 100338. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chbr.2023.100338
15. Li, Z., Wang, C., & Bonk, C. J. (2024). Exploring the utility of ChatGPT for self-directed online language learning. Online Learning, 28(3), 157–180. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1446866
16. Lintner, T. (2024). A systematic review of AI literacy scales. npj Science of Learning, 9(1), Article 50. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41539-024-00264-4
17. Mucci, T. (2024, October 21). The history of AI. IBM Think Topics. https://www.ibm.com/think/topics/history-of-artificial-intelligence
18. Ng, D. T. K., Leung, J. K. L., Chu, S. K. W., & Qiao, M. S. (2021). Conceptualizing AI literacy: An exploratory review. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 2, 100041. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2021.100041
19. Özden, M., Örge Yaşar, F., & Meydan, E. (2025). The relationship between pre-service teachers’ attitude towards artificial intelligence (AI) and their AI literacy. Pegem Journal of Education and Instruction, 15(3), 121–131. https://doi.org/10.47750/pegegog.15.03.13
20. Pinski, M., & Benlian, A. (2023). AI literacy – Towards measuring human competency in artificial intelligence. In Proceedings of the 56th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS) (Paper 3). https://aisel.aisnet.org/hicss-56/cl/ai_and_future_work/3
21. Soto-Sanfiel, M. T., Angulo-Brunet, A., & Lutz, C. (2024). The scale of artificial intelligence literacy for all (SAIL4ALL): A tool for assessing knowledge on artificial intelligence in all adult populations and settings [Preprint]. OSF. https://osf.io/bvyku
22. Sudin, V. D. K., & Swanto, S. (2024). Enhancing ESL learners’ reading comprehension and motivation via AI-generated personalised reading texts. International Journal on E-Learning Practices (IJELP), 7(1). https://doi.org/10.51200/ijelp.v7i1.5440
23. Toker Gökçe, A., Deveci Topal, A., Kolburan Geçer, A., & Eren, C. D. (2024). Investigating the level of artificial intelligence literacy of university students using decision trees. Education and Information Technologies, 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-13081-4
24. Turing, A. M. (2009). Computing machinery and intelligence. In R. Epstein, G. Roberts, & G. Beber (Eds.), Parsing the Turing test (pp. 23–65). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-6710-5_3
25. Tzirides, A. O., Zapata, G., Kastania, N. P., Saini, A. K., Castro, V., Ismael, S. A., You, Y., Afonso dos Santos, T., Searsmith, D., O'Brien, C., Cope, B., & Kalantzis, M. (2024). Combining human and artificial intelligence for enhanced AI literacy in higher education. Computers and Education Open, 6, Article 100184. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeo.2024.100184
26. UNESCO. (2025, February 11). What you need to know about literacy. https://www.unesco.org/en/literacy/need-know
27. Wang, B., Rau, P. L. P., & Yuan, T. (2023). Measuring user competence in using artificial intelligence: Validity and reliability of Artificial Intelligence Literacy Scale. Behaviour & Information Technology, 42(9), 1324–1337. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929X.2022.2072768
28. Webb, N. M., Franke, M. L., Ing, M., Wong, J., Fernandez, C. H., Shin, N., & Turrou, A. C. (2014). Engaging with others’ mathematical ideas: Interrelationships among student participation, teachers’ instructional practices, and learning. International Journal of Educational Research, 63, 79–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2013.02.001
29. Xu, J. (2025). Harnessing AI in academic writing: The complex interplay of AI literacy and self-directed learning among university L2 learners. System, 135, 103855. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2025.103855
30. Yang, H., Kim, H., Lee, J. H., & Shin, D. (2022). Implementation of an AI chatbot as an English conversation partner in EFL speaking classes. ReCALL, 34(3), 327–343. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0958344022000039
31. Younis, B. K. (2024). Examining students' self-regulation skills, confidence to learn online, and perception of satisfaction and usefulness of online classes in three suggested online learning environments that integrates ChatGPT. Online Learning, 28(2), n2. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v28i2.4397
32. Zhang, K., Li, L., & Yu, H. C. (2025). Analysis on concept of AI literacy according and future education to the result of systematic review. Journal of Lifestyle and SDGs Review, 5(1), e03293. https://doi.org/10.47172/2965-730X.SDGsReview.v5.n01.pe03293