Salta al menu principale di navigazione Salta al contenuto principale Salta al piè di pagina del sito
FrancoAngeli Journals

Articoli/Articles

V. 15 N. 2 (2024): Intelligenza Artificiale nella scuola e nella formazione universitaria. Rischi e opportunità

Generative Artificial Intelligence at school: University students perceptions and visions at Learning Sciences Faculty

DOI
https://doi.org/10.3280/ess2-2024oa18456
Inviata
10 settembre 2024
Pubblicato
31-01-2025

Abstract

This study explores the attitudes and perceptions of preservice teachers regarding applications of Generative Artificial Intelligence, with particular reference to ChatGPT and their use in school. Functional elements emerge for professors, teachers’ trainers, instructional designers. There is interest and appreciation of the potential, caution in considering use in the classroom, and incomplete awareness of the specific characteristics. The ability to adapt texts  is not perceived. Instead, confidence emerges in the reliability of the results when searching for information with the disbelief that they can be alternative tools to traditional search engines. The participants agree on the need for systematic and widespread training, which should involve preservice teachers, in-service teachers, and students.

Riferimenti bibliografici

  1. An X., Chai C. S., Li Y., Zhou Y., Shen X., Zheng C., and Chen M. (2023). Modeling English teachers’ behavioral intention to use artificial intelligence in middle schools. Education and Information Technologies, 28(5): 5187-5208.
  2. Attwood A. I., Bruster B. G. and Bruster B. G. (2020). An Exploratory Study of Preservice Teacher Perception of Virtual Reality and Artificial Intelligence for Classroom Management Instruction. Srate Journal, 29(2): 1-9.
  3. Carey M. D., Martin D. A., and McMaster N. (2024). The development and validation of a self-audit survey instrument that evaluates preservice teachers’ confidence to use technologies to support student learning. International Journal of Research and Method in Education, 1-23. DOI: 10.1080/1743727X.2024.2341714.
  4. Chan C. K. Y. and Lee K. K. (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): 1-23.
  5. Cong-Lem N., Tran T. N. and Nguyen T. T. (2024). Academic integrity in the age of generative AI: Perceptions and responses of Vietnamese EFL teachers. Teaching English with Technology, 24(1): 28-47.
  6. Cope C. and Ward P. (2002). Integrating learning technology into classrooms: The importance of teachers’ perceptions. Journal of Educational Technology and Society, 5(1): 67-74.
  7. Cuban L. (1986). Teachers and machines: The classroom use of technology since 1920. New York: Teacher College Press.
  8. Davis F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3): 319-340. DOI: 10.5962/bhl.title.33621.
  9. Demir K. and Güraksın G. E. (2022). Determining middle school students’ perceptions of the concept of artificial intelligence: A metaphor analysis. Participatory Educational Research, 9(2): 297-312.
  10. Di Grassi A., Beri A. and Agrati L.S. (2024). Students’ perceptions of chatgpt’s use in higher education. Giornale Italiano di Educazione alla Salute, Sport e Didattica Inclusiva, 8(2). DOI: 10.32043/gsd.v8i3.1162.
  11. European Parliament (2024). Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 June 2024 laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence. Official Journal of the European Union, https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=OJ:L_202401689.
  12. Floridi L. (2014). The Fourth Revolution: How the Infosphere is Reshaping Human Reality. New York Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  13. Manovich L. (2020). Cultural analytics. Cambridge (MA): MIT Press.
  14. Minsky M. (1968). Semantic Information Processing. Cambridge (MA): MIT Press.
  15. Munari B. (1977). Xerografie originali. Bologna: Zanichelli.
  16. Murgia E. and Bruni F. (2023). ChatGPT or not ChatGPT in education? A preliminary investigation at the university among prospective teachers. In: Perla L., Agrati L.S., Vinci V. e Scarinci A., a cura di, Living and Leading in the Next Era: Connecting Teaching, Research, Citizenship and Equity. Lecce: Pensa MultiMedia.
  17. Panciroli C. and Rivoltella P.C (2023). Pedagogia algoritmica. Per una riflessione educativa sull’Intelligenza Artificiale. Brescia: Morcelliana.
  18. Ranieri M., Cuomo S. and Biagini G. (2023). Scuola e intelligenza artificiale. Percorsi di alfabetizzazione critica. Roma: Carocci.
  19. Rivoltella P.C. and Rossi P.G. a cura di (2024). Tecnologie per l’educazione. Milano: Pearson.
  20. Sanusi I. T., Ayanwale M. A., and Chiu T. K. (2024). Investigating the moderating effects of social good and confidence on teachers’ intention to prepare school students for artificial intelligence education. Education and information technologies, 29(1): 273-295.
  21. Sumakul D. T. Y., Hamied F. A. and Sukyadi D. (2022). Artificial Intelligence in EFL Classrooms: Friend or Foe?. LEARN Journal: Language Education and Acquisition Research Network, 15(1): 232-256.
  22. Syahrin S. and Akmal N. (2024). Navigating the Artificial Intelligence Frontier: Perceptions of Instructors, Students, and Administrative Staff on the Role of Artificial Intelligence in Education in the Sultanate of Oman. Arab World English Journal (AWEJ) Special Issue on ChatGPT, 73-89.
  23. UNESCO (2019). Beijing consensus on artificial intelligence and education. In International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Education, Planning Education in the AI Era: Lead the Leap. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000368303.

Metriche

Caricamento metriche ...