Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence 4 (2023) 100132

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence

journal homepage: www.sciencedirect.com/journal/computers-and-education-artificial-intelligence

Acceptance of artificial intelligence in teaching science: Science

teachers’ perspective
Abdulla Al Darayseh
Emirates College for Advanced Education, United Arab Emirates

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Over the last few decades, there has been growing interest in artificial intelligence (AI) and how to apply it
Artificial intelligence effectively in the educational process. The behavioural intention and attitudes of teachers play an important role
Science teachers in this regard. The technology acceptance model (TAM) has been shown to be effective in predicting factors that
Technology acceptance model
may positively or negatively influence behavioural intentions to use technology. The current study therefore
Self-efficacy
Anxiety and stress
aims to use this model to reveal teachers’ perceptions of the factors that influence the use of AI applications in
science education. This research uses the descriptive method where a 6-dimensional scale is designed based on
the components of the TAM model and then applied to a sample of 83 science teachers in Abu Dhabi. The results
show a high acceptability of the use of AI in the classroom by science teachers, with positive correlations to self-
efficacy, ease of use, expected benefits, attitudes, and behavioural intentions. However, anxiety and stress do not
significantly affect other factors. Regarding the predictive power of research models, the combined factors ex­
pected benefits, ease of use, and attitude toward AI applications can predict 71.4% of future behavioural changes
related to the use of AI applications in science teaching. This study finds no statistically significant differences in
teacher responses based on the variables gender, teaching experience, and qualifications regarding teachers’
behavioural intentions to actually use AI in science teaching.

1. Introduction It is necessary to emphasize the great potential offered by AI for use

Technology has impacted almost every aspect of life today, and ed­
ucation is no exception. The world is currently moving towards the
employment of the fifth generation of the Internet or the so-called
Internet of Things in education, and there has been increasing interest
in the integration of artificial intelligence (AI) applications in teaching
and learning. AI’s importance has grown significantly, particularly since
the time of the closure of schools and universities as a result of the
corona (COVID-19) pandemic. Therefore, AI may have an impact on
educational practices, necessitating the development of learning man­
agement systems, evaluation tools, and other learning support mecha­
nisms (D’Mello & Graesser, 2012; Hwang & Tu, 2021).
According to the most recent research in the field of AI-based
learning, the more space is available for learning using modern appli­
cations, the more opportunities there are to improve the education
system and keep up with development. Because AI plays a variety of
important roles in the teaching–learning process and its components, it
has the potential to play a significant and tangible role in the learner’s
present and future (Mahmoud, 2020).
in education through the Internet and the accompanying vast de­
velopments that have created ease of access for students and teachers to
the information they need and want to obtain. As a result, it is necessary
to take advantage of the applications of AI and employ them in the
design of curricula, teaching methods, and assessment to obtain effec­
tive learning (Eltabakh, 2019).
Despite the great potential offered by AI-supported learning, AI’s
extensive use in science education may not guarantee teachers’ ability to
employ it in the classroom, and neither does it guarantee the quality of
teaching because teachers may not yet be fully prepared to implement
AI-based teaching (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural
Organization, 2019). Moreover, the effective adoption of new educa­
tional techniques is closely linked to the attitudes of science teachers
towards them. There is still a group of teachers who view the application
of technology in the classroom negatively and do not tend to use it but
rather continue to use traditional teaching materials and methodologies.
Concern about the use of new techniques may hamper teachers’ efforts
to apply technology in their work (Hébert et al., 2021; Tallvid, 2016).
In this context, in October 2017, the United Arab Emirates (UAE)

E-mail addresses: Abdulla.Aldarayseh@ecae.ac.ae, Derayseh@yahoo.com.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2023.100132
Received 17 October 2022; Received in revised form 13 December 2022; Accepted 7 February 2023
Available online 9 February 2023
2666-920X/© 2023 The Author. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
A. Al Darayseh
became one of the first countries to adopt a comprehensive strategy for
AI which focused on developing education through AI programs and
tools as one of its main axes (Sebaa et al., 2018). From this standpoint,
the UAE Ministry of Educationhas sought to use AI and digital trans­
formation to support the learning environment in schools. Moreover, the
ministry has developed and employed many digital educational plat­
forms in various study subjects that would contribute to the integration
of education and the development of independent self-learning (Minister
of State for Artificial Intelligence, 2020). Although the integration of AI
into the educational process in general and science education in
particular is an essential and irreplaceable course, there is a need for
more research on the reality of the nature of the external factors that
affect the use of AI applications as well as the benefits of AI and the
sustainability of their employment by science teachers. It is also neces­
sary to classify these factors according to their importance while iden­
tifying alternatives that ensure efficient use of AI. This research has been
done in response to the need to contribute to a study of factors affecting
the employment of AI applications in science teaching from teachers’
point of view.
2. Study problem
The UAE has given great importance to the field of AI, which has
been a central focus of many strategic national plans. UAE’s ministry of
education has also emphasized the need to use AI in the educational
process. This has been clearly defined in the Teacher Standards for the
UAE. In view of this fact, science teachers have to possess competencies
to use and integrate AI applications into their teaching practices. The
science curriculum is unique in the way it engages students besides
being the base in the science, technology, engineering, and mathematics
(STEM) strands. Therefore, integrating AI applications into learning
environments can affect student achievement (AL KHATEEB, 2021;
Palla & Sheikh, 2021).
The COVID-19 pandemic has also shown that science education re­
quires a type of teaching practice that enables the resources and appli­
cations of AI to be invested appropriately, for example, through dry
laboratories and interactive platforms (Al Darayseh, 2020). Therefore,
factors associated with the use of AI applications in science teaching
must be studied and understood through the technology acceptance
model (TAM), which refers to external and behavioural factors that help
to measure the attitudes and intentions concerning the actual use of AI
applications in science teaching. This model will be applied in this study
to come up with an integrated view of the impact of some internal and
external factors on the acceptance by science teachers to the employ­
ment of AI applications.
3. Study questions
This study seeks to identify the factors influencing the employment
of AI applications by science teachers using TAM by answering the
following questions.
1. How accepting are science teachers to the employment of AI in
teaching with respect to the components of TAM?
2. What factors influence the effectiveness of using AI applications in
science education given the components of TAM?
3. What impact do demographic variables (e.g. gender, teaching
experience, and qualification) have on intentions to actually use AI
applications in science teaching?
4. Study objectives
This study attempts to achieve the following objectives.
1. Identify the most important factors affecting the effectiveness of
using AI applications in science education.
2
Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence 4 (2023) 100132
2. Identify the relationship between factors that predict the acceptance
by science teachers of the employment of AI applications and the
behavioural intent to use them effectively in science teaching.
3. Detect statistically significant differences (α = 0.05) due to gender,
teaching experience, and qualification variables in the estimation of
study sample members about the acceptance by science teachers of
the use of AI applications in teaching.
5. Significance of the study
The importance of the study stems from the fact that it provides
theoretical and practical value, highlighting the development of a
structural model that explains the key factors influencing the acceptance
by science teachers of the use of AI applications. The model will provide
a coherent theoretical basis for improving the teaching of science
curricula. The practical significance of this research is reflected in the
recommendations it provides for those in charge of professional devel­
opment programs in the UAE. The study also addresses the need for the
consideration of various factors when developing and designing training
programs for science teachers in order to bridge the gap between the
reality of teaching practices and the aspirations of the ministry of edu­
cation. From a research standpoint, this paper allows researchers to
address the issue of using AI in the teaching and learning process from
perspectives other than those taken by this study.
6. Literature review
AI is one of the computer systems inspired by the ways humans use
their neural systems to understand, learn, think, and take appropriate
action (Stone et al., 2016). It was founded on the assumption that in­
telligence can be described so accurately that a machine can simulate it.
In its most advanced form, AI may have skills that are similar to learning,
recognizing situations, solving problems, and communicating in a nat­
ural language as humans do; AI is distinguished from other computer
programs by its ability to self-learn (Kok et al., 2009, pp. 1095–1107).
Nikitas et al. (2020) believe that AI is a concept that is still in its infancy
and has the ability to evolve and enhance the efficiency of the use of
resources of various kinds in all fields.
One of the most important applications of AI is in education. It has
begun to be regarded as a fundamental pillar in STEM education, and it
plays an important role in assisting teachers in their roles as facilitators
and assessors of learning. This is demonstrated by the possibilities for
analysing big data about the learning process collected from students,
teachers, and schools. For example, there was a successful primary
school mathematics class in which individual lessons were developed
and implemented based on the results of automated learning data
analysis of 44 teachers (Cukurova et al., 2021). Another example is the
chatbot, which is an AI-based program with technology that recognizes
and understands speech and then responds appropriately, providing
personalized learning support via tools as diverse as computers, mobile
devices, and speakers. Furthermore, Amazon Alexa and Google Home
are both well-known examples of AI-powered chatbots. The interaction
between chatbots and classroom learners may aid learning by providing
a platform for a new educational paradigm in various scientific disci­
plines (Topal et al., 2021).
According to Zhao et al. (2019) the use of AI-based teaching has a
positive impact on students’ academic achievement and also plays an
important role in overcoming word forgetfulness. Furthermore, Topal
et al. (2021) believe that chatbots can help with science teaching by
improving student performance and learning. Moreover, teachers’ use of
an AI-enhanced scaffolding system may have a positive impact on STEM
students’ scientific writing (Kim & Kim, 2022).
AI applications have the ability to receive, store, and process infor­
mation as well as promote self-learning, which helps a science teacher to
take into account individual differences among students, thus improving
the quality of learning and education. AI applications have the potential
A. Al Darayseh
to receive, store, and process information; their role appears to be great
in establishing and bringing together the scholarly concepts of a learner,
presenting scientific material interactively, as well as contributing to the
achievement of therapeutic goals consistent with the needs of students.
AI provides a large number of ready-made software for self-learning or
teacher-assisted learning; and these software can be used in discussions
and exchanges, which are reflected in the development of the educa­
tional process as a whole (Abu Zaqiyah, 2018). Consequently, AI ap­
plications contribute to the educational process through their impact on
content, teaching methods, calendar, and communication. Among the
most important areas where AI applications are used are.
1. Smart private teaching: This is about employing AI methods and
applications in simulating human private teaching and providing
learning activities that are compatible with a learner’s knowledge
needs along with constructive and immediate feedback (Luckin et al.,
2016).
2. Adaptive learning environments: They are based on plurality and
diversity of content presentation according to each student’s
learning methods and preferences. These environments are designed
using fuzzy logic, Bayesian networks, hidden Markov models, and
genetic algorithms (Colchester et al., 2017).
3. AI-based assessment: This is encouraged by employing AI applica­
tions in the design and correction of tests and performance tasks;
and, accordingly, the next step in a learner’s path is determined (Jin,
2019).
4. Smart content: This concept is of great importance as educational
robots can develop digital content at a high level and AI can help
digitize textbooks or create viable digital learning interfaces
(Al-Farani & Al-Hujaili, 2020).
5. Virtual reality (VR) technology: AI-based VR tools and applications
can be integrated into teaching, thus providing multi-sensory stim­
ulation and greatly assisting in mastering learning and attaining
previously unimaginable depths of knowledge and providing
learners with an interactive and lively learning environment and
allowing them to explore freely and learn independently (Jin, 2019).
Many tools and applications can be used in teaching science,
including PhET simulation, Labster Virtual Lab, and Third Space. In
addition, Xue and Wang (2022) have determined that mobile phone
applications are the most commonly used AI applications by teachers
followed by online teacher training platforms; some teachers also use
automatic correction systems.
According to current research, science teachers might have a low
level of awareness about the use of AI, and there is a need to raise that
awareness in order to understand the general characteristics of AI and
how to apply it in science teaching (AlKanaan, 2022; Shin & Shin, 2020).
Teachers must be adequately prepared to overcome challenges related to
a lack of appropriate educational resources as well as poor teaching
practices related to the use of AI to ensure the successful integration of
AI-related topics into teaching (Lindner & Romeike, 2019). According to
Mahmoud (2020), using various AI applications may help to overcome
the lack of interest in training teachers to use modern technological
techniques in teaching.
6.1. Technology acceptance model (TAM)
This model was developed to explain behaviour surrounding the use
of technology and the factors associated with its acceptance. According
to this model, the use of technology can be illustrated by the behavioural
intentions that form the result of conscious decision-making. Behav­
ioural intentions are determined by two types of factors: expected
benefits and ease of use. By dealing with these two factors, developers of
technological applications can have improved control of teachers’ atti­
tudes towards the applications, which will be reflected in their behav­
ioural intentions and actual use of these applications. A study by Saade
3
Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence 4 (2023) 100132
et al. (2007) indicated that TAM is a solid theoretical foundation that
can extend to the context of the study of digital education and its
applications.
According to TAM, the benefits of the use of AI are expressed by the
degree to which science teachers believe that AI applications improve
their performance while expected ease of use is related to the degree to
which science teachers believe that the use of these applications will not
entail any additional effort. Usage attitudes are seen as a factor that
directs future behaviour or causes certain intentions that ultimately lead
to a specific behaviour. Usage attitudes represent an evaluative effect of
teachers’ positive or negative feeling to behaving in a particular way
(Lew et al., 2019). According to this model, the actual use of technology
will be influenced – directly or indirectly – by the behavioural intentions
and attitudes of a teacher as well as by its expected benefits and ease of
use. The model indicates that there are external factors that may influ­
ence use intentions and actual use through the impact of these factors on
expected benefits and usability (Davis et al., 1989).
TAM has evolved over time to include many external factors, such as
social impact, experience, anxiety and stress, self-satisfaction, and self-
efficacy (Guner & Acarturk, 2020). Several previous studies have
confirmed the model’s effectiveness in predicting acceptance and
interpretation factors for the use of technological applications (Ali,
2019). The studies have also indicated the model’s contribution to
predicting interactions with and behavioural patterns of teachers to­
wards e-learning environments, augmented reality applications, and
metavirus technology (Asiri & El aasar, 2022; Aburbeian et al., 2020;
Durak, 2019).
Nikou and Economides (2019) investigated STEM teachers’ in­
tentions to use mobile-based assessments in their teaching practices.
According to their study, the proposed TAMBA model explained roughly
half of the variance in teachers’ intentions to use mobile-based assess­
ment. Teachers’ intention to use mobile-based assessment was also
influenced by the factor ‘perceived ease of use’. Moreover, the external
variables ‘supportive environment and outcomes quality’ had the most
influence on the model. A study by Wang et al. (2021) determined that
the five factors self-efficacy, anxiety, expected benefit, ease of use, and
attitudes towards AI contributed to 70.4% of changes in behavioural
intention while teachers’ self-efficacy had a positive impact on teachers’
perceived ease of use and attitudes toward adopting AI-based
applications.
Another study examined the factors that explain teachers’ accep­
tance of chatbots, and the results confirmed that perceived ease and
usefulness greatly lead to acceptance of chatbots. As for chatbot fea­
tures, the use of formal language by a chatbot leads to a high intent to
use it; and these results can help in the design of chatbots and improve
their acceptance by the educational community (Chocarro et al., 2021).
The research model shown in Fig. 1 was developed based on previ­
ously reviewed literature as well as the pillars of TAM to determine
factors influencing the application of AI in science teaching.
7. Methodology
The current study used a descriptive analytical approach: it aimed to
describe the phenomenon under investigation and attempted to identify
the factors that influence the use of AI applications in science teaching
with regard to TAM. To achieve the research objectives, a questionnaire
was used as a tool for data collection and analysis. Results and conclu­
sions are also listed.
7.1. Population and sampling
The study population included all science teachers who worked in
government schools in the Emirate of Abu Dhabi during the academic
year 2023/2022. A random sample of 83 science teachers was selected
with 30.1% of them being male and 69.9% being female. Looking at the
distribution of the sample members based on teaching experience,
A. Al Darayseh
Fig. 1. TAM Used in This Study.
10.8% have 1–5 years of experience, 13.3% have 6–10 years, and 75.9%
have more than 10 years. The data show that 71.1% of sample members
have a bachelor’s degree or higher.
7.2. Instrument of the study
A questionnaire was designed in its initial form in light of the study
objectives and questions and after reviewing previous studies such as
those done by Guner and Acarturk (2020), Wang et al. (2021), and Asiri
and El aasar (2022). The questionnaire was divided into three sections:
the first contained an introduction and general information about the
study’s subject, while the second contained demographic information
such as gender, teaching experience, and academic level. The third
section included 32 items that measured 6 factors: the first factor is
self-efficacy, which contains 5 items, the second is stress and anxiety,
which contains 6 items, the third is expected benefits, which contains 9
items, the fourth is ease of use, which contains 4 items, and the fifth is
attitude towards AI applications, which contains 4 items and the sixth
one is behavioural intention, which contains 5 items. It was also decided
on the use of the five-point Likert scale to rate the level of response. A
response of one indicates strongly disagree, and a response of five in­
dicates strongly agree.
7.3. Validity of the study Instrument
External validity was calculated by presenting the Likert scale to 10
experts to verify the accuracy, clarity, and suitability of the scale items.
The experts’ comments were taken into consideration, and the number
of paragraphs of the tool in its final form was 28 items.
After that, the questionnaire was given to a sample of 20 science
teachers outside the study sample in order to calculate the validity of the
internal consistency by calculating Pearson’s correlation coefficient
between the degree of each item and the total score of the factor to
which it belongs. The values of the correlations ranged between 0.632
and 0.974, all of which are statistically significant at α ≤ 0.01. The
correlation coefficients between the domain of the study tool and the
total score of the tool were also calculated and ranged between 0.91 and
0.94, and it is statistically significant at α ≤ 0.01.
Table 1
Cronbach’s Alpha Coefficient to Measure the Stability of the Study Tool.
Factor Number of Items Cronbach’s alpha coefficient
Self-efficacy 4 0.701
Stress and Anxiety 5 0.700
Expected Benefits 9 0.933
Ease of Use 3 0.796
Attitudes towards AI Apps 3 0.956
Behavioural Intention 4 0.910
Total 28 0.833
4
Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence 4 (2023) 100132
7.4. Reliability of the study Instrument
The reliability coefficient of the study tool was extracted using
Cronbach’s alpha, and the results are shown in Table 1. The values of
Cronbach’s alpha coefficient for the study domains and the scale as a
whole are greater than 0.7, which shows that the tool has a high degree
of reliability. This ratio is suitable for the purposes of the current study.
7.5. Statistical analyses
The study’s data were analysed using the statistical software SPSS
(IBM, New York, USA) and AMOS (IBM) and a variety of statistical
techniques, including frequencies, percentages, arithmetic means,
standard deviations, Pearson’s simple correlation coefficients, t tests for
the differences between the means of two independent samples, one-
way ANOVA, and path analysis.
8. Results and discussion
The current study sought to answer its research questions and discuss
and interpret them in light of the theoretical literature and previous
research.
8.1. Results and discussion related to the first question
In answer to the first question of the study, ‘How accepting are sci­
ence teachers to employing AI applications to teaching in light of the
components of the technology acceptance model?’, the results show that
the acceptance of science teachers to the use of AI applications in
teaching is high, with a total arithmetic mean of 3.90 as shown in
Table 2.
According to Table 2, the self-efficacy factor has an extremely high
impact on the effectiveness of using AI applications in teaching science,
with a general mean of 4.22, and the following factors have a high
impact that diminishes in this order: attitude toward AI apps, with an
arithmetic mean of 4.20, followed by expected benefits, with a general
mean of 4.19, behavioural intention, with an arithmetic mean of 4.10,
ease of use, with an arithmetic mean of 3.85, and the stress and anxiety
factor, with an arithmetic mean of 2.8. This result is aligned with the
findings of studies by Kim and Kim (2022) and Xue and Wang (2022),
which determined that most teachers perceive AI positively, and they
Table 2
Distribution of Sample Responses to the Model’s Factors.
Factor Arithmetic Mean Rank
Self-efficacy 4.22 1
Stress and Anxiety 2.8 6
Expected Benefits 4.19 3
Ease of Use 3.85 5
Attitudes Towards AI Apps 4.20 2
Behavioural Intention 4.10 4
Average 3.90
A. Al Darayseh
consider it as one of the pillars of science teaching.
This result can be attributed to the UAE Ministry of Education’s
launch of a new system for licensing teachers, which requires science
teachers to improve their use of available resources and employ modern
learning technology in their teaching. This system has contributed to
science teachers’ strong desire to use AI applications in their teaching.
On the other hand, during the COVID-19 pandemic, the shift to distance
learning increased the confidence of science teachers in using AI ap­
plications and made them good practitioners of technology skills,
allowing them to explore and use new AI-based platforms and applica­
tions such as smart learning portals and virtual laboratories (Al Dar­
ayseh, 2020). This shift, in turn, reinforced the acceptance of the use of
these applications in teaching science.
8.2. Results and discussion related to the second question
Path analysis using AMOS software was used to evaluate the pro­
posed study model and test relationships between variables in order to
answer the second question of the study, ‘What factors influence the
effectiveness of using AI applications in science education given the
components of the technology acceptance model?’
To ensure that there were no multiple correlations between the
factors in the model, a simple correlation factor was used through the
heterotrait–monotrait ratio test, and the results in Table 3 indicate that
the simple correlation factor values among all factors are below 0.9,
indicating no multiple correlation between variables (Hair et al., 2017).
As a result, the scale, shown in Fig. 2, developed in accordance with
extended TAM, can be considered valid for determining factors influ­
encing behavioural intention to use AI applications in science teaching.
Table 4 shows the results of path analysis to determine the factors
affecting the effectiveness of AI applications in science teaching with
respect to the components of the acceptance model of TAM, and the data
are also represented in Fig. 3. The findings indicate that there are 7 out
of 10 paths with a statistical standard regression coefficient that are
statistically significant and have a positive correlation: the standard
partial regression coefficient paths are SE on EU: 0.415, EU on EB: 0.592,
SE on EB: 0.473, EU on A: 0.479, EB on A: 0.699, EU on BI: 0.398, and A
on BI: 0.827.
This result can be attributed to the fact that teachers’ perceived ease
of use of AI applications as well as their possession of the necessary skills
to use them enhanced their positive attitudes and behavioural intentions
toward adopting them in the future. This outcome is consistent with the
findings of Lew et al. (2019) and aligns with the determinations of Nikou
and Economides (2019), which indicated the importance of the factor
‘perceived ease of use’ in influencing behavioural intentions of science
teachers. The results also agree with the studies of Wang et al. (2021)
and Chocarro et al. (2021) which showed that teachers’ self-efficacy and
perceived ease positively affect their attitudes toward adopting AI ap­
plications which leads to an enhanced acceptance of these applications
in science teaching.
Accordingly, the model can be modified after excluding non-
significant paths. The stress and anxiety factor was deleted because it
had no effect on any of the variables. The path expected benefits on
behavioural intention was deleted as well, and thus the final model
becomes as shown in Fig. 4.
Table 3
Simple Correlation Between Factors.
Factor Self-efficacy Stress and Anxiety Expected Benefits
Self-Efficacy 1
Stress and Anxiety − .141 1
Expected Benefits .530** − .078 1
Ease of Use .443** − .046 .602**
Attitudes Towards AI Apps .510** − .176 .815**
Behavioural Intention .481** − .220* .775**
*Significant at 0.05; **Significant at 0.01
5
Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence 4 (2023) 100132
These findings could be explained by the fact that having the
necessary competency, namely, self-efficacy, to deal with AI applica­
tions may give science teachers a sense of confidence and facilitate the
process of use of AI during teaching, thus reducing their level of anxiety
and stress, as happened during the corona pandemic, when the Ministry
of Education of the UAE implemented the ‘Disrupted Classrooms, Un­
interrupted Learning’ project (Khurma et al., 2022). Furthermore, the
use of AI technologies may increase a sense of pleasure during the
teaching process, as confirmed by Teo (2019), who reported that the
interaction between benefits and ease of use may have an impact on
teachers’ attitudes, which supports their behavioural intention to use
technology. Thus, when planning teacher training, decision-makers
should focus on authentic teaching strategies and pedagogy that allow
participants to employ such technologies in practical ways, thereby
facilitating their acquisition.
Table 5 illustrates the direct and indirect effects of the variables
included in the research model via the coefficient of determination R2,
which measures the predictive power of the model and has a value
ranging from 0 to 1, with high values indicating high levels of prediction
accuracy. According to the findings, the total standard effects of the
independent variables on the dependent variables ranged between
0.365 and 0.790.
The percentage of variance in the behavioural intention variable, or
explanatory power, reached 0.714. In other words, 71.4% of the changes
in behavioural intention that could occur in the future towards
employing AI applications in science teaching can be predicted using the
variables EB, EU, and A. Furthermore, the most influential determinant
of behavioural intention was ease of use, which had a total effect of
0.790, followed by teachers’ attitudes, which had a total effect of 0.742.
The findings also revealed that the R2 value for the variable attitudes
toward AI applications was 0.412, implying that the two variables EU
and EB explain 41.2% of the actual change in teachers’ attitudes, which
is consistent with the study by Wang et al. (2021).
8.3. Results and discussion related to the third question
To answer the study’s third question, ‘What impacts do demographic
variables (gender, teaching experience, and qualification) have on in­
tentions to actually use AI applications in science teaching?’, arithmetic
means, one-way ANOVA, and t-test were used. Table 6 shows the results
of the t-test for the difference between males and females with regard to
the behavioural intention of actual use. The results show that the value
of t-test reached 0.975 at a significance level of 0.341, which is a non-
statistically significant value at the probability level of 0.05. As a
consequence, there are no differences in behavioural intention based on
gender.
Table 7 shows the results of the one-way analysis of variance for the
difference in behavioural intention according to teaching experience,
and it shows that the t-test value is 0.431, with a significance level of
0.651; and that value is not statistically significant. The results of the t-
test for differences in behavioural intention according to academic level
are presented in Table 8. The findings show a value of 0.374 with a
significance level of 0.730, which is non-statistically significant at the
probability level of 0.05. This indicates that there are no differences in
behavioural intention according to academic level.
Ease of Use Attitudes Towards AI Apps Behavioural Intention
1
.712** 1
.726** .844** 1
A. Al Darayseh Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence 4 (2023) 100132

Fig. 2. Proposed Model.

9. Study limitation
Table 4
Results of Path Analysis.
One limitation of the current study is that it focuses on science
Standard Standard Confidence Significance Result teachers. Previous research has shown that Science and Mathematics
Regression Error Coefficient Level
teachers, compared to Language and Humanities teachers, have more
Coefficient
positive attitudes towards technology (Chiu & Churchill, 2016).
SE→EU .415 .181 2.300 .021 Accept Therefore, generalization of the study findings to teacher groups with
SA→EU .047 .073 .648 .517 Reject
SA→EB .085 .062 1.380 .168 Reject
different backgrounds should be made with caution and future studies
EU→EB .592 .147 4.025 *** Accept should include teachers with other backgrounds as well. Moreover,
SE→EB .473 .177 2.675 .007 Accept generalization should also take into consideration the cultural factors of
EU→A .135 3.556 *** Accept UAE context.
EB→A .699 .129 5.400 *** Accept
EB→BI .011 .123 .089 .929 Reject
EU→BI .398 .131 3.040 .002 Accept 10. Conclusion
A→BI .827 .137 6.034 *** Accept
The findings of this study revealed that science teachers have a high
level of acceptance for using AI applications in their classrooms. More­
The study concluded that there are no statistically significant dif­ over, the factors self-efficacy, expected benefits, ease of use, and atti­
ferences in sample responses based on variable (gender, teaching tudes toward AI applications have the greatest influence on teachers’
experience, and qualification) on intentions to actually use AI applica­ behavioural intention towards AI applications. One possible explanation
tions in science teaching. This could be due to teachers’ similar cir­ is that teachers’ information skills now have a certain level of training
cumstances and abilities as well as the lack of distinction between them. basics; when teachers consider integrating technologies into teaching,
Furthermore, the mutual understanding communicated by both science they directly consider the usefulness of technologies for teaching, and
teachers and the UAE Ministry of Education may be another reason decide whether to adopt or continue using them (Wang & Wang, 2009).
confirming that the ministry’s vision requires basic digital competencies On the other hand, the ease with which science teachers adopt AI ap­
and skills that are expected of all teachers regardless of gender, expe­ plications also affects their attitude towards using AI to support teach­
rience, or qualification. ing. Besides, teachers’ perceived ease of use of AI further influences their
It can also be inferred from the results that the training programs perceived usefulness as well as their behavior of employing AI to support
offered to science teachers are of a high standard, as indicated by the teaching. In other words, increasing teachers’ ease of integrating AI
study by Alramamnh et al. (2021). In addition to the development of applications into teaching science can also enhance their perceived
digital infrastructure in the UAE, there is an availability of digital plat­ usefulness of AI-assisted teaching, and facilitate their adoption behavior.
forms, tools, and applications in the majority of schools, which con­ The results informed the educators and policymakers that when plan­
tributes to easing the process of using them for science teachers despite ning training activities of adopting AI to support science teaching, it is
the teachers’ different experiences and qualifications. The findings of necessary to consider determine effective ways to mitigate teachers’ SA
this study agree with those of Ahmad (2019) and Almousa (2020) which and strengthen their SE of adopting AI applications in teaching. For
showed that there are no statistically significant differences – due to example, enhancing science teachers’ professional development through
varying years of experience – in the intention of secondary school female teacher training can help teachers spend less time learning how to adopt
teachers to use virtual laboratories in science teaching.

6
A. Al Darayseh Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence 4 (2023) 100132

Fig. 3. Results of Linear Analysis.

Fig. 4. Final Model After Modification.

AI in their teaching practice (Cheok et al., 2017; Kao & Tsai, 2009; Wang improve science teachers’ positive attitudes and play a significant role in
& Wang, 2009). At the same time, it is necessary to build teachers’ their self-efficacy.
awareness of the basic concepts of AI and provide them with convenient
tools to integrate into their teaching processes. This could help to

7
A. Al Darayseh Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence 4 (2023) 100132

Table 5
Coefficient of Determination (R2).
Independent Variable Dependent Variable Partial Regression Coefficient of Determination Significance Total Direct Indirect
Coefficient (R) (R2) Level Effect Effect Effect

Self-efficacy Ease of Use .411 .365 .024 .365 .365 0

Ease of Use Expected Benefits .605 .541 *** .541 .541 0
Self-Efficacy Expected Benefits .464 .368 .009 .556 .368 .197
Ease of Use Attitudes to AI .475 .603 *** .690 .364 .326
Applications
Expected Benefits Attitudes to AI .704 .011 *** .603 .603 0
Applications
Expected Benefits Behavioural Intention .015 .272 .906 .458 .011 .447
Ease of Use Behavioural Intention .396 .742 .002 .790 .272 .518
Attitude to AI Behavioural Intention .827 .731 *** .742 .742 0
Applications

- Investigating students’ acceptance of the use of AI applications in

Table 6
science education.
t-test Results for Gender Differences in Behavioural Intent.
Gender Number Arithmetic Standard t Significance
Mean Deviation value Level Declaration of competing interest
Male 25 16.8800 2.55473 .975 .341
Female 58 16.2241 2.98560
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
the work reported in this paper.

Table 7
References
t-test Results for Years of Teaching Experience Difference in Behavioural
Intention.
Abu Khurma, O., Al Darayseh, A., & Alramamneh, Y. (2022). The scattered and the
Years of Number Arithmetic Standard t Significance numerous digital learning technologies: Analysis of effective usage of during and
teaching Mean Deviation value Level after covid-19. Journal of Positive School Psychology, 6(8), 8688–8702.
experience Abu Zaqiyah, K. (2018). Expert systems in artificial intelligence and their employment in
education. Journal of Colleges of Education, 11(13), 111–116.
From 1 year 9 15.8889 2.71314 .431 .651 Aburbeian, M., Owda, Y., & Owda, M. (2022). A technology acceptance model survey of
to 5 years the metaverse prospects. A&I, 3(2), 285–302. https://doi.org/10.3390/ai3020018
6–10 years 11 15.9091 3.26970 Ahmad, R. (2019). The degree of using modern technology in teaching biology from the
More than 10 63 16.5873 2.83773 perspectives of secondary school teachers in zarqa schools (Unpublished master’s thesis
years [Middle East University]).
Total 83 16.4217 2.86323 Al Darayseh, A. (2020). The impact of COVID-19 pandemic on modes of teaching science
in UAE schools. Journal of Education and Practice, 11(20), 110–115.
AL Khateeb, K. (2021). Perceptions of UAE science teachers on effectiveness of online science
learning in COVID-19 pandemic [master dissertation. The British University (in
Table 8 Dubai]).
Al-Farani, L., & Al-Hujaili, S. (2020). Factors affecting the teacher’s acceptance of the use
t-test Results for Difference in Behavioural Intention According to Academic Level. of artificial intelligence in education in light of the Unified Theory of Acceptance and
Academic Number Arithmetic Standard t Significance Use of Technology (UTAUT). The Arab Journal of Educational and Psychological
Level Mean Deviation value Level Sciences, 4(14), 215–252.
AlKanaan, H. (2022). Awareness regarding the implication of artificial intelligence in
Bachelor 59 16.4915 2.86099 .347 .730 science education among pre-service science teachers. International Journal of
Postgraduate 24 16.2500 2.92292 Instruction, 15(3), Article 895912. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2022.15348a
Almousa, S. (2020). Acceptance of high school teachers to use virtual laboratories in
teaching science in light of the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology.
Journal of Educational Sciences, 4(14), 151–189.
11. Recommendations
Alramamnh, Y., Al Darayseh, A., & Al Saadi, S. (2021). The real status of online training
in the UAE from the perspective of teachers. Journal of Educational and Psychological
In light of the current study’s findings, the researcher recommends Sciences, 5(46), 26–42.
the following. Asiri, M., & El aasar, S. (2022). Employing technology acceptance model to assess the
reality of using augmented reality applications in teaching from teachers’ point of
view in najran. Journal of Positive School Psychology, 6(2), 5241–5255.
1. Raising awareness about the use of AI among science teachers Cheok, M., Wong, S., Ayub, A., & Mahmud, R. (2017). Teachers’ perceptions of e-
through training programs, awareness lectures, and seminars. learning in Malaysian secondary schools- frog VLE. Malaysian Online Journal of
Educational Technology, 5(2), 20–33. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1142390.
2. Provision of training on the use of AI applications in teaching to in- pdf.
service science teachers. Chiu, T. K. F., & Churchill, D. (2016). Adoption of mobile devices in teaching: Changes in
3. Inclusion of AI concepts and applications in pre-service teacher teacher beliefs,attitudes, attitudes and anxiety. Interactive Learning Environments, 24
(2), 317–327.
preparation programs. Chocarro, R., Cortiñas, M., & Matás, G. (2021). Teachers’ attitudes towards chatbots in
4. Provision of guidelines for using AI applications in teaching to sci­ education: A technology acceptance model approach considering the effect of social
ence teachers. language, bot proactiveness, and users’ characteristics. Educational Studies, 1–19.
https://doi.org/10.1080/03055698.2020.1850426
Colchester, K., Hagras, H., Alghazzawi, D., & Aldabbagh, G. (2017). A survey of artificial
Based on the current research findings, the researcher proposes the intelligence techniques employed for adaptive educational systems within E-learning
following future studies to complement what has been accomplished. platforms. Journal of Artificial Intelligence and Soft Computing Research, 7(1), 47–64.
https://doi.org/10.1515/jaiscr-2017-0004
Cukurova, M., Khan-Galaria, M., Millán, E., & Luckin, R. (2021). A learning analytics
- An analytic study of science curricula and the extent to which they approach to monitoring the quality of online one-to-one tutoring. Journal of Learning
include AI issues and applications. Analytics, 9(2), 105–120. https://doi.org/10.35542/osf.io/qfh7z
- A pilot study to assess the efficacy of a proposed training program to Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1989). User acceptance of computer
technology: A com-parison of two theoretical models. Management Science, 35(8),
develop science teachers’ competencies in using AI in the classroom. 982–1002.

8
A. Al Darayseh
D’Mello, S., & Graesser, A. (2012). Dynamics of affective states during complex learning.
Learning and Instruction, 22(2), 145–157. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
learninstruc.2011.10.001
Durak, H. (2019). Examining the acceptance and use of online social networks by
preservice teachers within the context of unified theory of acceptance and use of
technology model. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 31(1), 173–209.
Eltabakh, H., & Ismail, A. (2019). Design of E-learning environment based on formative
adaptive tests model and their impact on the development of cognitive achievement
of computer and data security course and self-efficacy skills for computer teacher
students. EAECJ, 7(2), 1–64.
Guner, H., & Acarturk, C. (2020). The use and acceptance of ICT by senior citizens: A
comparison of technology acceptance model (TAM) for elderly and young adults.
Universal Access in the Information Society, 19(2), 311–330.
Hair, J., Hult, T., Ringle, C., & Sarstedt, M. (2017). A primer on partial least squares
structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
Hébert, C., Jenson, J., & Terzopoulos, T. (2021). Access to technology is the major
challenge”: Teacher perspectives on barriers to DGBL in K-12 classrooms. E-Learning
and Digital Media, 18(3), 307–324. https://doi.org/10.1177/2042753021995315
Hwang, G. J., & Tu, Y. F. (2021). Roles and research trends of artificial intelligence in
mathematics education: A bibliometric mapping analysis and systematic review.
Mathematics, 9(6). https://doi.org/10.3390/math9060584
Jin, L. (2019). Investigation on potential application of artificial intelligence in preschool
children’s education. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1288, Article 012072.
https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1288/1/012072
Kao, C. P., & Tsai, C. C. (2009). Teachers’ attitudes toward web-based professional
development, with relation to Internet self-efficacy and beliefs about web-based
learning. Computers & Education, 53(1), 66–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.
2008.12.019.
Kim, N., & Kim, M. (2022). Teacher’s perceptions of using an artificial intelligence-based
educational tool for scientific writing. Frontiers in Education, 7. https://doi.org/
10.3389/feduc.2022.755914. Article 755914.
Kok, J. N., Boers, E. J., Kosters, W. A., van der Putten, P., & Poel, M. (2009). Artificial
intelligence: Definition, trends, techniques, and cases. Knowledge for sustainable
development: An insight into the encyclopedia of life support systems. Eolss Publishers.
Lew, S. L., Lau, S. H., & Leow, M. C. (2019). Usability factors predicting continuance of
intention to use cloud e-learning application. Heliyon, 5(6), 1-11. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.heliyon.2019.e01788.
Lindner, A., & Romeike, R. (2019). Teachers’ perspectives on artificial intelligence.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/337716601.
Luckin, R., Holmes, W., Griffiths, M., & Forcier, B. (2016). Intelligence unleashed: An
argument for AI in education. Pearson Education.
Mahmoud, A. (2020). Artificial intelligence applications: An introduction to education
development in the light of corona virus pandemic COVID 19 challenges.
International Journal of research in Educational Sciences, 3(4), 171–224.
Minister of State for Artificial Intelligence. (2020). National program for artificial
intelligence. https://ai.gov.ae/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/AIGuide_EN_v1-online.
pdf.
Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence 4 (2023) 100132
Nikitas, A., Michalakopoulou, K., Njoya, E., & Karampatzakis, D. (2020). Artificial
intelligence, transport and the smart city: Definitions and dimensions of a new
mobility era. Sustainability MDPI Journal, 12(7), 1–19.
Nikou, S. A., & Economides, A. A. (2019). Factors that influence behavioral intention to
use mobile-based assessment: A STEM teachers’ perspective. British Journal of
Educational Technology, 50(2), 587–600.
Palla, A., & Sheikh, A. (2021). Impact of social media on the academic performance of
college students in Kashmir. Information Discovery and Delivery, 49(4), 298–307.
Saade, R., Nebebe, F., & Tan, W. (2007). Viability of the "technology acceptance model"
in multimedia learning environments: A comparative study. Journal of eLearning and
Learning Objects, 3, 175–184. https://doi.org/10.28945/392
Sebaa, A., Yousfi, M., & Melouki, O. (2018). AI application at the international level
(United Arab Emirates as a model). Journal of al mayadine al iktissadia, 1(1), 31–41.
Shin, S., & Shin, H. (2020). A study on the application of artificial intelligence in
elementary science education. Journal of Korean Elementary Science Education, 39(1),
117–132. https://doi.org/10.15267/KESES.2020.39.1.117
Stone, P., Brooks, R., Brynjolfsson, E., Calo, R., Etzioni, O., Hager, G., et al. (2016).
Artificial intelligence and life in 2030. In Proceedings of the one hundred year study on
artificial intelligence: Report of the 2015–2016. Stanford, CA: Stanford University.
Tallvid, M. (2016). Understanding teachers’ reluctance to the pedagogical use of ICT in
the 1: 1 classroom. Education and Information Technologies, 21(3), 503–519. https://
doi.org/10.1007/s10639-014-9335-7
Teo, T. (2019). Students and teachers’ intention to use technology: Assessing their
measurement equivalence and structural invariance. Journal of Educational
Computing Research, 57(1), 201–225.
Topal, A. D., Eren, C. D., & Geçer, A. K. (2021). Chatbot application in a 5th grade science
course. Education and Information Technologies, 26(5), 6241–6265. https://doi.org/
10.1007/s10639-021-10627-8
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization [UNESCO]. (2019). The
challenge and opportunities of artificial intelligence in education. Paris: The United
Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization.
Wang, W. T., & Wang, C. C. (2009). An Empirical study of instructor adoption of web-
based learning systems. Computers & Education, 53(3), 761–774. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.compedu.2009.02.021
Wang, Y., Liu, C., & Tu, Y.-F. (2021). Factors affecting the adoption of AI-based
applications in higher education: An analysis of teachers perspectives using
structural equation modeling. Educational Technology & Society, 24(3), 116–129.
https://www.jstor.org/stable/27032860.
Xue, Y., & Wang, Y. (2022). Artificial intelligence for education and teaching. Wireless
Communications and Mobile Computing, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1155/2023/
9830273. Article ID 4750018.
Zhao, L., Chen, L., Liu, Q., Zhang, M., & Copland, H. (2019). Artificial intelligence-based
platform for online teaching management systems. Journal of Intelligent and Fuzzy
Systems, 37(1), 45–51.