Generative-AI, a Learning Assistant? Factors Influencing Higher-Ed Students' Technology Acceptance

Authors

  • Kraisila Kanont Department of Educational Technology and Communications, Faculty of Education, Chulalongkorn University, Thailand https://orcid.org/0009-0004-9353-6441
  • Pawarit Pingmuang Department of Educational Technology and Communications, Faculty of Education, Chulalongkorn University, Thailand https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8881-4372
  • Thewawuth Simasathien Department of Educational Technology and Communications, Faculty of Education, Chulalongkorn University, Thailand https://orcid.org/0009-0006-8491-1216
  • Suchaya Wisnuwong Department of Educational Technology and Communications, Faculty of Education, Chulalongkorn University, Thailand https://orcid.org/0009-0007-2724-9964
  • Benz Wiwatsiripong Department of Educational Technology and Communications, Faculty of Education, Chulalongkorn University, Thailand https://orcid.org/0009-0007-9045-9999
  • Kanitta Poonpirome Department of Educational Technology and Communications, Faculty of Education, Chulalongkorn University, Thailand https://orcid.org/0009-0004-2838-1295
  • Noawanit Songkram Learning Innovation for Thai Society Research Unit (LIFTS), Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7616-2132
  • Jintavee Khlaisang Center of Excellence in Educational Invention and Innovation, Department of Educational Technology and Communications, Faculty of Education, Chulalongkorn University, Thailand https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7572-9782

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.34190/ejel.22.6.3196

Keywords:

Artificial Intelligence in education, Educational technology, Generative-AI, Student perceptions, Technology Acceptance Model, SEM research

Abstract

This study investigates the factors influencing the adoption of Generative-AI tools amongst Thai university students, employing the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) as a theoretical framework. Data from 911 higher education students from 10 different Thai Universities Health Sciences, Sciences and Technology, Social Sciences and Humanities, and Vocational Fields were analysed via Structural Equation Modelling (SEM). The instrument used in collecting the data was a questionnaire. Results indicated that Expected Benefits, Perceived Usefulness, Attitude Toward Technology, and Behavioural Intention all significantly impacted student adoption of Generative AI. Intriguingly, Perceived Ease of Use was negatively correlated with Perceived Usefulness, challenging conventional TAM assumptions. This study underscores the need to address language barriers, foster a culture of innovation, and establish ethical guidelines to promote responsible AI use within education. Despite inherent limitations, this research contributes to our understanding of AI adoption in educational settings and helps inform strategies for equitable access and responsible innovation. The result demonstrated that the easier a tool was to use, the less value leaners seemed to see in it for their learning process. It can be implied that as Generative-AI get more intuitive, learners think they're less helpful. These finding challenges a few of those assumptions we usually make within the TAM model. It also points out the characteristic of learners which affects their learning preferences and expectation. Another finding showed the impact of language barrier on non-native English speaker that obstruct the user experience in AI services.  Moreover, the role of universities in fostering both AI integration for learning for and the ethical implementation of Generative AI. By providing a supportive environment that encourages AI experimentation, redesign learning, empowering learners and faculty instructors to investigate how Generative AI can be applied across disciplines, and developing guidelines for ethical use, universities play a critical role in shaping the effective and responsible integration of AI into the next educational landscape.

Author Biographies

Kraisila Kanont, Department of Educational Technology and Communications, Faculty of Education, Chulalongkorn University, Thailand

Ph.D. candidate at Chulalongkorn University

Pawarit Pingmuang, Department of Educational Technology and Communications, Faculty of Education, Chulalongkorn University, Thailand

Ph.D. candidate at Chulalongkorn University

Thewawuth Simasathien, Department of Educational Technology and Communications, Faculty of Education, Chulalongkorn University, Thailand

Ph.D. candidate at Chulalongkorn University

Suchaya Wisnuwong, Department of Educational Technology and Communications, Faculty of Education, Chulalongkorn University, Thailand

Ph.D. candidate at Chulalongkorn University

Benz Wiwatsiripong, Department of Educational Technology and Communications, Faculty of Education, Chulalongkorn University, Thailand

Ph.D. candidate at Chulalongkorn University

Kanitta Poonpirome, Department of Educational Technology and Communications, Faculty of Education, Chulalongkorn University, Thailand

Ph.D. candidate at Chulalongkorn University

Noawanit Songkram , Learning Innovation for Thai Society Research Unit (LIFTS), Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand

Professor at Chulalongkorn University

Jintavee Khlaisang, Center of Excellence in Educational Invention and Innovation, Department of Educational Technology and Communications, Faculty of Education, Chulalongkorn University, Thailand

Professor at Chulalongkorn University

Downloads

Published

18 Jun 2024