A Study of Instructors’ Confidence towards the Utilization of Chatgpt as an Educational Tool

A Study of Instructors’ Confidence towards the Utilization of Chatgpt as an Educational Tool

¹Johan @ Eddy Luaran., ²Husna Asyikin Binti Mohammad Tajudin., ³Jasmine Jain

^1,2Faculty of Education, Universiti Teknologi MARA

³School of Education, Taylor’s University

DOI: https://doi.org/10.51244/IJRSI.2025.12020056

Received: 08 February 2025; Accepted: 12 February 2025; Published: 12 March 2025

ABSTRACT

This study aims to bridge a significant research gap by examining instructors’ confidence in effectively implementing ChatGPT as an educational tool. It dives into diverse aspects, investigating instructors’ self-belief in troubleshooting issues, adapting to various contexts, overseeing student interactions, and incorporating ChatGPT seamlessly into their teaching methods. The research employs a quantitative methodology, centering around an exploration of key questions. These questions aim to determine instructors’ institutional types, investigate the degree of instructors’ confidence, examining the level of acceptance of instructors towards the integration of ChatGPT as a tool for future teaching and learning practices, and assess the correlation between confidence and level of acceptance of ChatGPT. In the nutshell, there is a significant relationship between instructors’ confidence towards the usage of ChatGPT and instructors’ acceptance of ChatGPT as teaching and learning tool at the 0.05 level. The findings indicate 69% (r² = 0.69) of the instructor’s confidence level have an influence to the acceptance level of utilizing ChatGPT as the future of Teaching and Learning. As education continues to evolve, it should prioritize a strategy of collaboration, where educators, students, and technology work harmoniously, resulting in a dynamic and inclusive educational environment.

Keywords: ChatGPT, educational tool, confidence, technological aptitude

INTRODUCTION

The educational landscape has been significantly transformed in recent years, primarily driven by the rise of emerging technologies impacting instructional methods. Among these technological breakthroughs, ChatGPT, an advanced language model crafted by OpenAI, has risen to prominence as a tool with the potential to enhance the learning experience. As traditional teaching methods continue to adapt and evolve, it’s increasingly vital not just to understand the opportunities these technologies offer, but also to gauge educators’ preparedness and confidence in integrating them seamlessly into their instructional strategies. Thus, this study sets out on a comprehensive analysis of instructors’ confidence in leveraging ChatGPT as a teaching aid.

Since its public introduction in November 2022, ChatGPT, an accessible AI model, has experienced a significant surge in acceptance. Renowned for its capacity to process and produce vast quantities of textual content, this platform emerged as a go-to tool for educational purposes. The effectiveness of ChatGPT in synthesizing texts and creating content made it a popular choice in the realm of teaching and learning (Baidoo-Anu & Owusu Ansah, 2023)

The potential applications of ChatGPT in teaching, research, and professional activities frequently serve as the focal point of investigative discussions (Emenike & Emenike, 2023). Reviews conducted in the healthcare sector, however, indicate that these findings may not be universally applicable or transferable. This limitation mirrors the effect AI has had on nursing education and dental education. In these cases, it’s concluded that AI falls short in comprehending the intricacy of human anatomy.

BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY

Education, in its trajectory through time, has witnessed profound shifts as technology advanced. The conventional blueprint was infused with personal human instruction, physical resources, and direct classroom engagements. Educators took centre-stage in distilling knowledge through lectures, experiential learning, and manually maintained assessments. The incorporation of AI-aided learning mechanisms, however, doesn’t unequivocally dovetail with a teacher’s adeptness in technology deployment, nor does it enhance the excellence of teaching (Mercader and Gairin, 2020). Mutual peer learning and regular professional development were essential cogs in the educational machine. Human interaction, proactive participation and enriching experiences are the bedrock of efficacious pedagogy

The birth of artificial intelligence (AI) has infused fresh perspectives into the teaching and learning dynamics. Language models such as ChatGPT can cater to individual tutoring needs, facilitate automated grading, and foster interactive learning situations. Substantially, these tech-rich provisions can optimise education’s reach, rendering it universal, inclusive and adept at matching varied learning styles. However, their integration mandate is sensibly weighed plan that focuses on potential bias reduction, ethical considerations, and encouraging responsible usage.

The synchronization of AI into educational scenarios has ascended to a predominant stance in academic discourse. With an intensifying need for personalised and dynamic learning processes, offerings like ChatGPT present a transformative opportunity to recreate conventional teacher-student interactions. It’s crucial to unspool the complexities of educators’ confidence in deploying such digital assistance for their successful embrace across varied educational settings. Although past surveys have pondered upon potential advantages of AI in pedagogy, the understanding of educators’ assurance and readiness to utilise advanced language models remains largely uncharted. This research commits to fill in this knowledge void by executing an exhaustive inspection of instructors’ confidence in manoeuvring ChatGPT across diverse dimensions.

Problem Statement

Despite numerous years dedicated to professional enhancement around educational technology’s integration, a sizable cohort of teachers maintains a negative view of classroom technology implementation. They show a marked reluctance to use it (Kaban & Ergul, 2020; Istenic et al., 2021). These educators predominantly resort to the same educational resources and teaching practices while actively avoiding the incorporation of any elements that could yield adverse outcomes (Tallvid, 2016). As a result, this inherent anxiety surrounding the deployment of new technologies can emerge as a significant impediment for these teachers (Zimmerman, 2006)

From this viewpoint, it’s essential for educators to not only understand AI functionalities, but also to skilfully integrate them into their lesson plans and curricula. Furthermore, the broad integration of advanced technology into teaching methods requires a solid grasp of the significance of educational technology, along with the potential advantages it brings to the learning process (Kim & Kim, 2022). Research has highlighted the critical role of technology use, including intelligent tutoring systems, mobile devices, learning analytics, and augmented/virtual reality applications within the most personalized learning approaches (Li & Wong, 2018).

Considering the above, there’s an emerging agreement underscoring the need for detailed investigations focusing on the challenges related to the educator’s role such as acceptance, student engagement, and adaptability. For educators, extensive familiarity with AI technologies is a necessity to include them in personalized learning experiences. Gaining user understanding is a pivotal step towards successfully integrating AI in the educational context, which in turn leads to the measurement of positive outcomes (Chang & Lu, 2020).

Despite the growing interest in incorporating AI-centric tools like ChatGPT into educational practices, there’s a notable lack of research specifically addressing educators’ proficiency in using these technologies. The inherent challenges and complexities of adapting these advanced language models to diverse teaching environments could pose significant barriers to their successful application.

Research Objectives

The research objectives of the study are:

1. To identify the instructors’ confidence level in their ability to effectively use ChatGPT.
2. To examine the level of acceptance of ChatGPT as the future of Teaching and Learning, among tertiary education instructors.

• To investigate the relationship in instructors’ confidence towards the usage of ChatGPT, with the acceptance level of ChatGPT as the future education tool.

Research Questions

The research questions guiding this study are as follows:

1. What is the instructors’ confidence level in their ability to use ChatGPT?
2. What is the level of acceptance of ChatGPT as the future of Teaching & Learning?

• Is there a significant relationship between instructors’ confidence level of using ChatGPT, and with level of acceptance of ChatGPT as the future of Teaching and Learning?

1. H0: There is no significant relationship between instructors’ confidence level of using ChatGPT, with level of acceptance of ChatGPT as the future of Teaching and Learning.
2. H1: There is no significant relationship between instructors’ confidence level of using ChatGPT, with level of acceptance of ChatGPT as the future of Teaching and Learning.

Research Design

This research applies a descriptive-correlation design, aiming explore the instructors’ levels of confidence, and with the acceptance level of ChatGPT. As stated by Creswell (2005), a correlation study is utilized for examining associations between independent and dependent variables. Ary, Jacobs Sorensen and walker (2014) claims that correlation reflect the relationship between paired scores. Since data could be statistically analysed to determine the whether instructor’s confidence level have an impact to the acceptance level of utilizing ChatGPT as the future of Teaching and Learning; a correlation research design is applicable for this study. Questionnaires were used to collect data for this study, and the Statistical Package for Social Sciences programme was used to analyse the data (SPSS). Tables were used to display the results.

In this study, data was gathered using ten-point Likert Scale questionnaires to see if there was a connection between the independent variable and dependent variable. Therefore, a correlation approach was used in this study to analyse the quantitative data. The findings were examined to see if the instructor’s confidence level have an influence to the acceptance level of utilizing ChatGPT as the future of Teaching and Learning.

Population and Sampling

Population is the subject matter of interest to the researcher and the group to which the study’s finding should ideally apply (Parmjit et. al, 2006). The sample used in this study was a non-probability sample while using quantitative method. For the purpose of this study, the target population is tertiary educators in Klang Valley, Malaysia. The method used was sampling population and it was handed out to 30 instructors and responded the questionnaires sent via google form. The google form was used to send out questionnaires to ensure the practicality and convenience of respondents in answering the questions. The sample size of the study population using Krejcie and Morgan (1970) table was applied upon determining the sample size. The most important aspect to consider is that the sample drawn from the participants must be sufficiently representative for the researcher to draw conclusion or generalize about the understudied group (Maleske, 1995).

Data Collection

The collection of data was done through primary sources. The data was derived from the respondents via google form and the respondents were given timeframe to complete the questionnaire. There were 30 respondents in the population who responded the questionnaire. The collected data then went through a cleaning process to remove the null data to ensure the analysis procedure gave a clear result. Once gathered, all the data entered into SPSS to identify the findings of this case study among tertiary school instructors in Klang Valley. The questionnaire was distributed through LinkedIn and WhatsApp, in a google form format.

Instrumentation

The instruments of this study consist of questionnaires that were adapted and adopted from the previous study to match the purpose of the study. The data later was analysed using Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS).

Questionnaire           

A questionnaire offers perceptions of the individuals inside an organization. It is an appropriate technique for gathering information regarding ambiguous issues or obvious opportunity (Patten, 1998). In this study, the questionnaire was adapted from a study by Parmjit S. (2023). The questionnaire was provided in English to ensure that respondents accurately understood the questions and their meanings.

Table 1: Demographic Information Section

Section	Description	No of Item
Part A	Demographic	12

Table 2: Instruments Section

Section	Instrument No.	Variables	Factor
Part B	B: Q1-Q6	Independent Variable	Instructor’s confidence towards the usage of ChatGPT
Part C	C: Q1-Q11	Dependent Variable	The Acceptance of ChatGPT as the future of Teaching and Learning

The questionnaires were divided into three sections consisting of Part A focusing on the demographic of the respondents. Part B were focused on the assessing instructor’s confidence in their ability to effectively use ChatGPT. It explores their self-assurance in troubleshooting issues, adapting ChatGPT to different contexts, guiding students’ interaction, and seamlessly integrating ChatGPT into their instructional practices. Part B is representing the independent variable.

Lastly, Part C were focus on examining the level of acceptance and attitudes of instructors towards the integration of ChatGPT as a tool for future Teaching and Learning practices. It aims to understand the perceptions and beliefs of instructors regarding the potential benefits, adoption intention and attitudes towards the use of ChatGPT in educational settings. Part C is mainly presenting dependent variable of this study.

Data Analysis

The collected raw data was inspected to ensure it is complete and accurate. Questionnaire were organized and classified according to the study objectives. Quantitative data were analysed using computer software Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 22.0 to enable mathematical computations since analysing data manually would be tedious and would lead to errors. The analysed data were presented using frequencies, standard deviation percentages and mean.

Table 3: Summary of research questions, statistical tests and data analysis techniques

N	Research Questions	Statistics	Data Analysis Techniques
1	What is the instructors’ confidence level in their ability to use ChatGPT?	Descriptive	Mean, Standard Deviation
2	What is the level of acceptance of ChatGPT as the future of Teaching & Learning?	Descriptive	Mean, Standard Deviation
3	Is there a significant relationship between instructors’ confidence level of using ChatGPT, and with level of acceptance of ChatGPT as the future of Teaching and Learning?	Inferential	Correlation Analysis; Pearson product-moment

Demographics of the Respondent

In this study, the researchers conducted a study by having a questionnaire that has been answered by the teachers in the tertiary education institution in Klang Valley, Malaysia. 30 respondents participated in the questionnaire resulting various backgrounds from each of them.

Table 4: Gender of Instructors

Gender
	Frequency	Percent
Male	7	23
Female	23	77
Total	30	100.0

Table 4 provides data on the demographic profile of the instructors’ gender. The total number of male respondents involved in this research is23% (N=7) who is slightly lower than the female which is 77% (N=23) respondents.

Table 5: Institution Type

Institution Type
	Frequency	Percent
Public University	11	36.7
Private University	17	56.7
College	2	6.7
Total	30	100.0

Table 5 displays the types of institutions to which the respondents belong. From the total respondents, most instructors come from the private tertiary institution, which consists of 56.7% (N=17). 36.7% of them are instructors from the public tertiary institution (N=11). Finally,6.7% (N=2) are represented by instructors coming from the colleges.

Table 6: Technological Proficiency of the Instructors

Technological Proficiency
	Frequency	Percent
Novice: Limited experience with technology	5	16.7
Intermediate: Familiar with basic digital tools and online platform	15	50.0
Advanced: Proficient in using a wide range of digital tools and online platform	10	33.3
Total	30	100.0

Table 6 consists of instructor’s self-evaluation technological proficiency. Out of 30 respondents, 50% (N=15) claims to have intermediate level of technological proficiency, where they are familiar with the basic digital tools and online platform.33.3% (N=10) identified themselves as proficient in using wide range of digital tools and online platform, also known as advanced. Whereas, 16.7% (N=5) claims to be novice or limited experience with technology.

RESULT OF THE STUDY

These analyses will deal with the research objectives by addressing the research questions established.

Research Question 1: What is the instructors’ confidence level in their ability to use ChatGPT?

Table 7: Instructors’ Confidence Towards the Usage of ChatGPT

	N	Mean	Std. Deviation
I feel confident in my ability to use ChatGPT as a teaching aid effectively.	30	3.90	3.17
I am comfortable troubleshooting and addressing issues that may arise when using ChatGPT.	30	6.40	2.25
I believe I can adapt and modify ChatGPT to suit different teaching contexts and subjects.	30	6.63	2.11
I have confidence in my ability to integrate ChatGPT seamlessly into my instructional practices.	30	6.47	2.16
I am confident in my knowledge of the limitations and potential risks associated with ChatGPT.	30	6.53	2.03
I believe my expertise as an instructor enhances my ability to utilize ChatGPT effectively.	30	6.50	1.94
[Overall] Instructors’ confidence towards the usage of ChatGPT	30	6.07	1.82
Scale 1 to 10 (1- Strongly Disagree, 10- Strongly Agree)

Table 7 shows the mean score of instructors’ confidence in their ability to effectively use ChatGPT as a teaching aid, among tertiary instructors in Klang Valley. The overall mean score obtained by instructors’ confidence towards the usage of ChatGPT is 6.07 with a standard deviation of 1.82. This indicates instructors involved in the study, are slightly high-level confidence in themselves to effectively use ChatGPT as teaching aid.

Research Question 2: What is the level of acceptance of ChatGPT as the future of Teaching & Learning?

Table 8: Instructors’ Acceptance of ChatGPT as the Future of Teaching and Learning

	N	Mean	Std. Deviation
CA: Subdomain: Perceived benefits	30	6.85	1.89
CB: Subdomain: Attitudes towards change	30	7.43	1.74
[Overall] Instructor’s acceptance of ChatGPT as teaching and learning tool	30	7.14	1.77
Scale 1 to 10 (1- Strongly Disagree, 10- Strongly Agree)

Table 8 shows the mean score of instructors’ level of acceptance and attitudes of instructors towards the integration of ChatGPT as a tool for the future teaching and learning practices. The overall mean score obtained by instructors’ acceptance of ChatGPT as the future of teaching and learning is 7.14 with a standard deviation of 1.77. This indicates instructors involved in the study, are slightly high-level willing to accept the integration of ChatGPT as a tool for future teaching and learning practices.

Research Question 3: Is there a significant relationship between instructors’ confidence level of using ChatGPT, and with level of acceptance of ChatGPT as the future of Teaching and Learning?

H0: There is no significant relationship between instructors’ confidence level of using ChatGPT, with level of acceptance of ChatGPT as the future of Teaching and Learning.

H1: There is no significant relationship between instructors’ confidence level of using ChatGPT, with level of acceptance of ChatGPT as the future of Teaching and Learning.

Table 9: Relationship between instructors’ confidence towards the usage of ChatGPT and instructors’ acceptance of ChatGPT as teaching and learning tool.

		Instructors’ confidence towards the usage of ChatGPT	Instructor’s acceptance of ChatGPT as teaching and learning tool
Instructors’ confidence towards the usage of ChatGPT	Pearson Correlation	1	.833**
	Sig. (2-tailed)		<.001
	N	30	30
Instructor’s acceptance of ChatGPT as teaching and learning tool	Pearson Correlation	.833**	1
	Sig. (2-tailed)	<.001
	N	30	30
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Table 9 shows a moderately high positive relationship (r= 0.833, p<0.01) between instructors’ confidence towards the usage of ChatGPT and instructors’ acceptance of ChatGPT as teaching and learning tool at the 0.05 level. Thus, we reject hull hypothesis. It shows that the more confident the instructor is on their ability to effectively use ChatGPT as the teaching aid, the higher the level of acceptance of the instructor towards the integration of ChatGPT as a tool for future teaching and learning practices. The findings indicate 69% (r² = 0.69) of the instructor’s confidence level have an influence to the acceptance level of utilizing ChatGPT as the future of Teaching and Learning.

Implication

The implication of this study adds to the literature on the integrating AI technology with education. The result extracted from the study would also provide evidence that instructors’ confidence in their ability to effectively use ChatGPT as a teaching aid give a significant relationship towards instructors’ level of acceptance towards integrate ChatGPT as a tool for future teaching and learning practices.

This study would also help to provide a better comprehension of the educator’s point of view on amalgamating technology with education. On top of that, this will also address the current gap in information and make the connection between assumptions, theories and practices, to be well informed.

Providing with this finding, the education leadership and stakeholders will be able to understand the lack of confidence in the instructors may impact the acceptance level of technology in Education.

RECOMMENDATION

Based on the findings from the case study that has been conducted, there are a few recommendations that could be useful for concerned parties. These recommendations are solely suggested based on the data collected from this study.

Firstly, the recommendation for further studies is to be conducted with larger samples. The current case study only focuses on tertiary educators in Klang Valley, Malaysia. While there could be more coverage geographically, to see opinion and result from the rural area as well. Further study can include primary schools’ and secondary schools’ instructors as part of the studies to see different aspect of the study.

Secondly, future study may also want to have a depth study on the relationship between acceptance technology as the future of Teaching and Learning, with validity of students’ performance and standard operating procedure for the integration. Future study may consider having a mixed method research that includes interview to better understand the instructors’ point of view.

To end, it is recommended that the future study may investigate a broader aspect using the same dimensions than what was used in current study that potentially correlate two or more variables.

CONCLUSION

This case study focuses on describing the relationship of instructors’ confidence in their ability to effectively use ChatGPT as a teaching aid, with examining the level of acceptance and attitudes of instructors towards the integration of ChatGPT as a tool for future teaching and learning practices.

It explores instructors’ self-assurance in troubleshooting issues, adapting ChatGPT to different contexts and guiding student’s interactions, and seamlessly integrating ChatGPT into their instructional practices.

On top of that, this study divulges the curiosity to understand the perceptions and beliefs of instructors regarding the potential benefits, adoption intentions, and attitudes toward the use of ChatGPT in educational settings. In conclusion, there is a positive relationship between instructors’ confidence and the acceptance level of ChatGPT as the future of teaching and learning.

REFERENCES

1. Bahar Memarian & Tenzin Doleck (2023). Computers in Human Behavior: Artificial Humans. Journal of Computers in Human Behavior: Artificial Human. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ehbah.2023.100022
2. Nam Ju Kim & Min Kyu Kim (2022). Teacher’s Perception of Using an Artificial Intelleigence-Based Educational Tool for Scientific Writing. Digital Learning Innovation, Fronties ion Education. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.20222755914
3. Emenike, M. E., & Emenike, B. U. (2023). Was this title generated by ChatGPT? Considerations for artificial intelligence text-generation software programs for chemists and chemistry educators. Journal of Chemical Education, https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.3c00063
4. Mercader, C., & Gairín, J. (2020). University teachers’ perception of barriers to the use of digital technologies: The importance of the academic discipline. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education.
5. Kaban, A. L., & Ergul, I. B. (2020). Teachers’ attitudes towards the use of tablets in six EFL classrooms. In L. Tomei & E. Podovšovnik (Eds.), Examining the Roles of Teachers and Students in Mastering New Technologies.
6. Istenic, A., Bratko, I., & Rosanda, V. (2021). Are pre-service teachers disinclined to utilize embodied humanoid social robots in the classroom? British Journal of Educational Technology. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13144
7. Zimmerman, J. (2006). Why some teachers resist change and what principals can do about it. NASSP Bulletin. https://www.sciepub.com/reference/341331
8. Chang, C. H., & Lu, H. P. (2020). Examining the relationships among e-learning systems usage, self-regulated learning, and learning behavior intention: A hybrid approach using PLS-SEM and machine learning. Computers & Education. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.103808
9. Turing, A. M. (1950). Computing Machinery and Intelligence. Mind,.
10. Sanchez-Prieto, J. C., Olmos-Migueláñez, S., & García-Peñalvo, F. J. (2020). Internet addiction among university students: Demographic and social characteristics. Computers in Human Behavior https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.09.006
11. Holmes, W., Bialik, M., & Fadel, C. (2019). Artificial Intelligence in Education: Promises and Implications for Teaching and Learning.
12. Johnson, D. W., & Samora, M. (2020). Effective Communication in Online Learning. Journal of Educational Technology, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeducatech.2020.05.003
13. Perkins, M. (2023). Academic integrity considerations of AI large language models in the post-pandemic era: ChatGPT and beyond. Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice, https://doi.org/10.53761/1.20.02.07
14. Ahmad, R., Aslam, M., & Hussain, S. (2023). Social exchange theory: Systematic review and future directions. Frontiers in Psychology. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1015921
15. Bahrini, L., Gomaa, H., Abou-Ghattas, H., & El-Aziz, T. A. (2023). ChatGPT: Applications, opportunities, and threats. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2304.09103
16. Bahrini, L., Gomaa, H., Abou-Ghattas, H., & El-Aziz, T. A. (2023). The social impact of Generative AI: An analysis on ChatGPT. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2403.04667
17. Ibrahim, R. L., Al-Mulali, U., Ajide, K. B., Mohammed, A., & Al-Faryan, M. A. S. (2023). The implications of food security on sustainability: Do trade facilitation, population growth, and institutional quality make or mar the target for SSA?
18. Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology.
19. Venkatesh, V., & Bala, H. (2008). Technology acceptance model 3 and a research agenda on interventions. Decision Sciences.
20. Teo, T. (2011). Factors influencing teachers’ intention to use technology: Model development and test. Computers & Education.
21. Holden, R. J., & Rada, R. (2011). Understanding the influence of perceived usability and technology self-efficacy on nurses’ acceptance of the electronic medical record system. Journal of Healthcare Management.
22. Compeau, D. R., & Higgins, C. A. (1995). Computer self-efficacy: Development of a measure and initial test. Management Information Systems Quarterly.
23. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Prentice-Hall.
24. Ary, D., Jacobs, L. C., Sorensen, C., & Walker, D. A. (2014). Introduction to research in education (9th ed.). Cengage Learning.
25. Creswell, J. W. (2005). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (2nd ed.). Pearson Education.
26. Parmjit S., Chan Y.F. and Gurnam K.S., 2006. (2006). A Comprehensive Guide to Writing a Research Proposal, Kuala Lumpur: Venton
27. Krejcie, R. V., & Morgan, D. W. (1970). Determining sample size for research activities.
28. Maleske, R. (1995). The fundamentals of small group communication. Longman.
29. Patten, M. L. (1998). Understanding research methods: An overview of the essentials.