ArticleFrontiers in psychology2024
University teachers' beliefs about the use of generative artificial intelligence for teaching and learning.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Effectiveness of generative artificial intelligence-based teaching versus traditional teaching methods in medical education: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.BMC medical education · 2025Pooled it
- Research on the optimization of the training system of university faculty development centers in the context of GenAI: a comparative analysis based on Chinese and Kazakhstani universities.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Teacher Cognition and Practices in Using Generative AI Tools to Support Student Engagement in EFL Higher-Education Contexts.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: The growing presence of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) in our society, particularly in the educational field, is undeniable. This fact has led to various studies on its implications for learning and teaching. However, as with other technological resources, these implications will depend on how teachers use GenAI. Therefore, it is essential to identify teachers' beliefs regarding the use of GenAI for teaching and learning. Methods: To this end, a questionnaire was designed and completed by 321 university teachers. This questionnaire consisted of two parts. The first included questions about the participants' demographic information and a Likert scale on teachers' pedagogical beliefs. The second part consisted of a 32-item Likert scale that evaluated teachers' beliefs about the impact of GenAI on their students' learning and their own teaching. These aspects were reflected through items that considered GenAI as either an educational opportunity or a threat. Results: The results showed that, of all the variables analyzed, only pedagogical beliefs and the frequency of previous GenAI use influenced beliefs about GenAI usage. Specifically, teachers with constructivist beliefs saw greater potential in GenAI compared to others. Similarly, teachers who regularly used these technologies had more positive beliefs about their educational use than those who used them sporadically or not at all. Lastly, it was also observed that while teachers valued the positive effects of GenAI on their teaching work, they also considered that its use could be detrimental to the learning processes of their students, making them more superficial. Discussion: These findings underline the importance of providing teachers with training focused on constructive approaches that enable them to maximize the potential of GenAI in education. In particular, it is crucial to promote teaching practices that, through student-centered GenAI use, foster active and reflective processes in students, aligned with the competencies demanded by today's society.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.