A Quantitative Study on the Influence of Readiness and Perceived Usefulness on Malaysian Primary ESL Teachers’ Intention to Integrate AI in Language Learning and Teaching

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is increasingly transforming English Language Teaching (ELT), yet limited empirical evidence exists on how Malaysian primary ESL teachers perceive and intend to use AI tools in classroom practice. This study investigates teachers’ readiness, perceived usefulness and behavioural intention to integrate AI, addressing a gap in empirical research within the Malaysian primary school context. A quantitative survey design was employed, involving 80 primary ESL teachers who completed a structured questionnaire adapted from the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM). Descriptive statistics indicated moderately high levels of readiness, strong perceptions of usefulness and high intention to adopt AI. Pearson correlation analysis revealed strong, positive and statistically significant relationships among the three constructs. Multiple regression results further showed that perceived usefulness was the strongest predictor of intention, followed by teacher readiness. Openended responses provided supplementary insights, highlighting teachers’ need for hands-on training, practical examples and continuous professional development. Overall, the study offers timely empirical evidence on AI adoption in Malaysian primary ESL classrooms and underscores the importance of enhancing teachers’ digital competence and pedagogical capacity for sustainable and meaningful AI integration.

Artificial Intelligence (AI), teacher readiness

1. Ahmad, N., Alias, F. A., Hamat, M., & Mohamed, S. A. (2024). Reliability analysis: Application of Cronbach’s Alpha in research instruments. SIG e-Learning@CS, 2(4). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. https://appspenang.uitm.edu.my/sigcs/2024-2/Articles/20244_ReliabilityAnalysis-ApplicationOfCronbachsAlphaInResearchInstruments.pdf [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Alsalem, M. S. (2024). EFL teachers’ perceptions of the use of an AI grading tool (CoGrader) in English writing assessment at Saudi universities: An activity theory perspective. Cogent Education, 11(1), 2430865. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2024.2430865 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. An, X., Chai, C. S., Li, Y., Zhou, Y., Shen, X., Zheng, C. P., & Chen, M. Y. (2023). Modeling English teachers’ behavioral intention to use artificial intelligence in middle schools.Education and Information Technologies, 28(5), 5187–5208. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11286-z [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Chan, K. K.-W., & Tang, W. K.-W. (2024). Evaluating English teachers’ artificial intelligence readiness and training needs with a TPACK-based model. World Journal of EnglishLanguage, 15(1), 129. https://doi.org/10.5430/wjel.v15n1p129 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational research: planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. (4th Ed). Longman. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Daud, K. A. M., Ahmad, N., & Hashim, F. (2018). Validity and reliability of instrument to measure social media skills among SMEs. International Journal of Development and Sustainability, 7(3), 1026–1037. https://isdsnet.com/ijds-v7n3-15.pdf [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Granström, M., & Oppi, P. (2025). Assessing teachers’ readiness and perceived usefulness of AI in education: An Estonian perspective. Frontiers in Education, 10, 1622240. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2025.1622240 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Guan, L., Lee, J. C.-K., Zhang, Y., & Gu, M. M. (2025). Investigating the tripartite interaction among teachers, students, and generative AI in EFL education: A mixed-methods study. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 8, 100384. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2025.100384 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Hisham, I. F. H., & Yunus, M. M. (2025). Exploring the integration of ChatGPT for teaching English in a Malaysian primary school. International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science, 9(26), 8376–8386. https://doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.903SEDU0630 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Jackman, G.-A., Marshall, I. A., & Carrington, T. (2025). Opportunity or threat: Investigating faculty readiness to adopt artificial intelligence in higher education. Caribbean Journal of Educational Development, 1(2). https://doi.org/10.46425/cjed120102 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Kavitha, K., Joshith, V.P. (2024). Artificial Intelligence Powered Pedagogy: Unveiling Higher Educators' Acceptance with Extended TAM. Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice, 21(8). https://doi.org/10.53761/s1pkk784 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Kohnke, L., & Ulla, M. B. (2024). Embracing generative artificial intelligence: The perspectives of English instructors in Thai higher education institutions. Knowledge Management & E-Learning, 16(4), 653–670. https://doi.org/10.34105/j.kmel.2024.16.030 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Metwally, A. A., & Bin-Hady, W. R. A. (2025). Probing the necessity and advantages of AI integration training for EFL educators in Saudi Arabia. Cogent Education, 12(1), Article 2472462. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2025.2472462 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Ministry of Education Malaysia. (2013). Malaysia Education Blueprint 2013–2025 (Preschool to Post-Secondary Education). Putrajaya: Government of Malaysia. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Ministry of Education Malaysia. (2024). Digital Education Policy 2024–2030. Government of Malaysia. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Mustroph, C., & Steinbock, J. (2024). ChatGPT in foreign language education – Friend or foe? A quantitative study on pre‑service teachers’ beliefs. Technology in Language Teaching and Learning, 6(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.29140/tltl.v6n1.1133 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Noor, S., Tajik, O., & Golzar, J. (2022). Simple Random Sampling. International Journal of Education & Language Studies,1(2),78-82. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). McGraw-Hill. SPSS Statistics (Version 28). IBM Corporation. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Piaget, J. (1970). Science of education and the psychology of the child (D. Coltman, Trans.). Orion Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Riggs, V. (2025). Teachers’ perceptions and readiness for AI integration in under-resourced K-12 classrooms. Journal of Research Initiatives, 9(1), Article 1. https://digitalcommons.uncfsu.edu/jri/vol9/iss1/1 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Runge, I., Hebibi, F., & Lazarides, R. (2025). Acceptance of pre-service teachers towards artificial intelligence (AI): The role of AI-related teacher training courses and AI- TPACK within the Technology Acceptance Model. Education Sciences, 15(2), 167. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15020167 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Sivanganam, J., Yunus, M. M., & Said, N. E. M. (2025). Teachers’ Perceptions in Using Artificial Intelligence (AI) in ESL Classrooms. International Journal of Academic Research in Progressive Education and Development, 14(1), 2409–2427. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. Tafazoli, D. (2024). Exploring the potential of generative AI in democratizing English language education. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 7, 100275. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2024.100275 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. Tan, W. S., Yunus, M. M., & Ismail, H. H. (2025). A systematic literature review: Teachers’ perceptions on the usage of ChatGPT in English language teaching (ELT). International Journal of Academic Research in Progressive Education and Development, 14(1), 1583–1595. https://doi.org/10.6007/IJARPED/v14-i1/24781 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. 26. Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (2000). A theoretical extension of the Technology Acceptance Model: Four longitudinal field studies. Management Science, 46(2), 186–204. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.46.2.186.11926 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

28. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

29. Wang, X., & Cheng, Z. (2020). Cross-Sectional studies: Strengths, weaknesses and recommendations. Chest Journal, 158, 65-71. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

30. Wulandari, M., & Purnamaningwulan, R. A. (2024). Exploring Indonesian EFL pre-service teachers’ experiences in AI-assisted teaching practicum: Benefits and drawbacks. LLTJournal: A Journal on Language and Language Teaching, 27(2), 878–894. https://doi.org/10.24071/llt.v27i2.8690 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

31. Xiaofan, W., & Annamalai, N. (2025). Investigating the use of AI tools in English language learning: A phenomenological approach. Contemporary Educational Technology, 17(2), 578. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/16188 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

32. Zainuddin, N. M., Bukhari, N. A., & Mohamad, M. (2024). Implementation of Artificial Intelligence (Ai) As A Pedagogical Tool in Tertiary ESL Classroom: Teachers’ Perspectives. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 14(8), 907–921. http://dx.doi.org/10.6007/IJARBSS/v14-i8/22456 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• The Impact of Ownership Structure on Dividend Payout Policy of Listed Plantation Companies in Sri Lanka
• Urban Sustainability in North-East India: A Study through the lens of NER-SDG index
• Performance Assessment of Predictive Forecasting Techniques for Enhancing Hospital Supply Chain Efficiency in Healthcare Logistics
• The Fractured Self in Julian Barnes' Postmodern Fiction: Identity Crisis and Deflation in Metroland and the Sense of an Ending
• Impact of Flood on the Employment, Labour Productivity and Migration of Agricultural Labour in North Bihar