Analysis Of Generative AI Applications Usage By Elementary School Teacher Education Students In Supporting The Learning Process
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.70963/jpr.v4i2.161Keywords:
Generative AI, Mixed Methods, TAM, UGTAbstract
The penetration of generative AI (GenAI) applications in Indonesian higher education has increased significantly; however, the understanding of the multi-application usage ecosystem among pre-service elementary school teachers remains limited. This study aims to describe the usage patterns of 13 GenAI applications by Elementary School Teacher Education (PGSD) students at Universitas Katolik Musi Charitas and to understand the functions, motives, and perceived limitations in designing lesson plans. A Convergent Parallel Mixed Methods design was applied using two parallel strands: the QUAN strand utilized an online questionnaire administered to 101 students (analyzed using descriptive frequencies and percentages), and the QUAL strand employed purposive in-depth interviews with 9–13 informants, which were analyzed using thematic analysis. Integration was conducted through a joint display at the interpretation stage. ChatGPT dominated the usage (85.1%; n=86), followed by Grammarly (21.8%; n=22) and Google Bard/Gemini (10.9%; n=11). The primary purpose of usage was seeking references or additional learning resources (83.2%). Four main themes were identified: (T1) the function of GenAI in lesson plan design, (T2) motives for selecting specific applications, (T3) perceived limitations, and (T4) usage patterns of multi-application combinations with ChatGPT as the primary application. The joint display results showed a convergence between the QUAN data and QUAL findings regarding the dominance of ChatGPT, and revealed that the purpose of use reported in the questionnaire ("seeking references") refers to specific pedagogical functions in designing teaching modules.
References
Allman, B., Kimmons, R., Wang, W., Bao, H., Rosenberg, J. M., & Koehler, M. J. (2024). Trends and topics in educational technology, 2024 edition. TechTrends, 68(3), 402–410. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-024-00950-5
Anh, V. T. K., & Nguyen, H. (2024). Generative artificial intelligence and ChatGPT in language learning: EFL students’ perceptions of technology acceptance. Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice, 21(06). https://doi.org/10.53761/fr1rkj58
Ankamah, S., Gyesi, K., & Amponsah, V. (2024). Awareness, knowledge, and attitude towards artificial intelligence: Perspective of medical students in Ghana. Information Development, 41(3), 843–858. https://doi.org/10.1177/02666669241283790
Batta, A. (2024). Transforming higher education through generative AI: Opportunity and challenges. Paradigm a Management Research Journal, 28(2), 241–243. https://doi.org/10.1177/09718907241286221
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101.
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2020). Can I use TA? Should I use TA? Comparing reflexive thematic analysis and other pattern-based qualitative analytic approaches. Counselling and Psychotherapy Research, 21(1), 37–47. https://doi.org/10.1002/capr.12360
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2024). Supporting best practice in reflexive thematic analysis reporting in Palliative Medicine. Palliative Medicine, 38(6), 608–616. https://doi.org/10.1177/02692163241234800
Chang, Y., Lee, S., Wong, S. F., & Jeong, S.-P. (2021). AI-powered learning application use and gratification: An integrative model. Information Technology and People, 35(7), 2115–2139. https://doi.org/10.1108/itp-09-2020-0632
Creswell, J. W. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340.
Fetters, M. D., & Tajima, C. (2022). Joint displays of integrated data collection in mixed methods research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 21. https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069221104564
Gado, S., Kempen, R., Lingelbach, K., & Bipp, T. (2021). Artificial intelligence in psychology: How can we enable psychology students to accept and use artificial intelligence? Psychology Learning & Teaching, 21(1), 37–56. https://doi.org/10.1177/14757257211037149
Hirose, M., & Creswell, J. W. (2022). Applying core quality criteria of mixed methods research to an empirical study. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 17(1), 12–28. https://doi.org/10.1177/15586898221086346
Hwang, H. J., Liu, C., & Qin, C. (2023). Development and validation of a digital literacy scale in the artificial intelligence era for college students. KSII Transactions on Internet and Information Systems, 17(8). https://doi.org/10.3837/tiis.2023.08.016
Kanont, K., Pingmuang, P., Simasathien, T., Wisnuwong, S., Wiwatsiripong, B., Poonpirome, K., Songkram, N., & Khlaisang, J. (2024). Generative-AI, a learning assistant? Factors influencing higher-ed students’ technology acceptance. The Electronic Journal of E-Learning, 22(6), 18–33. https://doi.org/10.34190/ejel.22.6.3196
Katz, E., Blumler, J. G., & Gurevitch, M. (1973). Uses and gratifications research. The Public Opinion Quarterly, 37(4), 509–523.
Li, W., Zhang, X., Li, J., Yang, X., Li, D., & Liu, Y. (2024). An explanatory study of factors influencing engagement in AI education at the K-12 level. Scientific Reports, 14(1). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-64363-3
Love, H. R., Fettig, A., & Steed, E. A. (2023). Putting the “mix” in mixed methods. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 43(3), 174–186. https://doi.org/10.1177/02711214231199268
Mahrishi, M., Abbas, A., & Radovanovic, D. (2024). Emerging dynamics of ChatGPT in academia: A scoping review. Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice, 21(1). https://doi.org/10.53761/b182ws13
Makruf, I., P, H. R. P., Choiriyah, S., & Nugroho, A. (2021). Flipped learning and communicative competence: An experimental study of English learners. International Journal of Education in Mathematics Science and Technology, 9(4), 571–584. https://doi.org/10.46328/ijemst.1960
Naeem, M., Ozuem, W., Howell, K. E., & Ranfagni, S. (2023). A step-by-step process of thematic analysis to develop a conceptual model in qualitative research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 22. https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069231205789
Pedersen, I. (2024). Generative AI adoption in postsecondary education, AI hype, and ChatGPT’s launch. The Open/Technology in Education Society and Scholarship Association Journal, 4(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.18357/otessaj.2024.4.1.59
Thompson, K., Corrin, L., & Lodge, J. M. (2023). AI in tertiary education: Progress on research and practice. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 39(5), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.9251
Wooldridge, M. (2021). A brief history of artificial intelligence. Flatiron Books.
Wulyani, A. N., Widiati, U., Muniroh, S., Rachmadhany, C. D., Nurlaila, N., Hanifiyah, L., & Sharif, T. I. S. T. (2024). Patterns of utilizing AI-assisted tools among EFL students: Need surveys for assessment model development. LLT Journal: A Journal on Language and Language Teaching, 27(1), 157–173. https://doi.org/10.24071/llt.v27i1.7966
Zhou, Y., Zhou, Y., & Machtmes, K. (2023). Mixed methods integration strategies used in education: A systematic review. Methodological Innovations, 17(1), 41–49. https://doi.org/10.1177/20597991231217937
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Thatet Dirgantara, Ria Triayomi , Petrus Murwanto , Agnes Fibriana Kurniawati
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
