Abstract

With the rapid development of artificial intelligence, generative AI has increasingly influenced global language education. However, empirical research on the acceptance of generative artificial intelligence by pre-service international Chinese language teachers is limited. This study sought to investigate the acceptance and influencing mechanisms of generative artificial intelligence among pre-service international Chinese language teachers. Qualitative research methods, including semi-structured interviews and focus group discussions, were employed, and the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology model was used for analysis. The study revealed that pre-service international Chinese language teachers generally recognised the pedagogical value of generative AI, viewing it as a tool to enhance teaching efficiency. However, they also identified practical concerns such as students’ over-reliance on the technology, detachment from cultural context, and potential intellectual property risks. Performance expectancy, effort expectancy, social influence, and facilitating conditions all influenced teachers’ willingness to use generative artificial intelligence, with performance expectancy having the most significant positive impact. At the same time, technical limitations, insufficient training, and unclear policies were found to be significant barriers that reduced teachers’ acceptance intention. Ultimately, pre-service international Chinese language teachers exhibited a dual-track acceptance attitude, balancing instrumental rationality with humanistic considerations. The findings provided empirical support for the integration of generative artificial intelligence into international Chinese language education

Keywords

professional development; interview method; international education; cultural exchange; social influence

References

  1. Alasim, K.N. (2019). Reading development of students who are deaf and hard of hearing in inclusive education classrooms. Education Sciences, 9(3), article number 201. doi: 10.3390/educsci9030201.
  2. An, X., Chai, C.S., Li, Y., Zhou, Y., Shen, X., Zheng, C., & Chen, M. (2023). Modeling English teachers’ behavioral intention to use artificial intelligence in middle schools. Education and Information Technologies, 28(5), 5187-5208. doi: 10.1007/s10639-022-11286-z.
  3. Cabero-Almenara, J., Palacios-Rodríguez, A., Loaiza-Aguirre, M.I., & Andrade-Abarca, P.S. (2024). The impact of pedagogical beliefs on the adoption of generative AI in higher education: Predictive model from UTAUT2. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence, 7, article number 1497705. doi: 10.3389/frai.2024.1497705.
  4. Chen, Z., Xin, Z., & Wang, N. (2024). Research on the current situation and enhancement strategies of digital literacy of preschool education pre-service teachers in the era of artificial intelligence. In Proceedings of the 4th international conference on internet, education and information technology (IEIT 2024) (pp. 11-19). Paris: Atlantis Press. doi: 10.2991/978-94-6463-574-4_3.
  5. Chiu, T.K. (2024). The impact of Generative AI (GenAI) on practices, policies and research direction in education: A case of ChatGPT and Midjourney. Interactive Learning Environments, 32(10), 6187-6203. doi: 10.1080/10494820.2023.2253861.
  6. Đerić, E., Frank, D., & Milković, M. (2025). Trust in generative AI tools: A comparative study of higher education students, teachers, and researchers. Information, 16(7), article number 622. doi: 10.3390/info16070622.
  7. Gao, Y., Wang, Q., & Wang, X. (2024). Exploring EFL university teachers’ beliefs in integrating ChatGPT and other large language models in language education: A study in China. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 44(1), 29-44. doi: 10.1080/02188791.2024.2305173.
  8. Hu, L., Wang, H., & Xin, Y. (2025). Factors influencing Chinese pre-service teachers’ adoption of generative AI in teaching: An empirical study based on UTAUT2 and PLS-SEM. Education and Information Technologies, 30(9), 12609-12631. doi: 10.1007/s10639-025-13353-7.
  9. Huang, T., Wu, C., & Wu, M. (2025). Developing pre-service language teachers’ GenAI literacy: An interventional study in an English language teacher education course. Discover Artificial Intelligence, 5, article number 163. doi: 10.1007/s44163-025-00435-1.
  10. Ifenthaler, D., & Schweinbenz, V. (2020). Understanding academics’ adoption of learning technologies: A systematic review. Computers & Education, 151, article number 103857. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2020.103857.
  11. Lai, Y. (2024). ChatGPT in international Chinese language education: Opportunities, potential problems, and solution strategies. World Journal of Educational Studies, 2(2), 48-53. doi: 10.61784/wjesv2n2102.
  12. Liu, C., Yang, L., Dong, X., & Li, X. (2025). Factors influencing generative AI usage intention in China: Extending the acceptance-avoidance framework with perceived AI literacy. Systems, 13(8), article number 639. doi: 10.3390/systems13080639.
  13. Mafa, R.K., & Govender, D.W. (2025). Exploring teachers’ technology adoption: Linking TPACK knowledge and UTAUT-3 constructs. Discover Education, 4, article number 88. doi: 10.1007/s44217-025-00480-z.
  14. Moorhouse, B.L., & Kohnke, L. (2024). The effects of generative AI on initial language teacher education: The perceptions of teacher educators. System, 122, article number 103290. doi: 10.1016/j.system.2024.103290.
  15. Nistor, N., Göğüş, A., & Lerche, T. (2013). Educational technology acceptance across national and professional cultures: A European study. Educational Technology Research and Development, 61(4), 733-749. doi: 10.1007/s11423-013-9292-7.
  16. Nurtanto, M., Nawanksari, S., Perdana Sutrisno, V.L., Syahrudin, H., Kholifah, N., Rohmantoro, D., Utami, I.S., Mutohhari, F., & Abi Hamid, M. (2025). Determinants of behavioral intentions and their impact on student performance in the use of AI technology in higher education in Indonesia: A SEM-PLS analysis based on TPB, UTAUT, and TAM frameworks. Social Sciences & Humanities Open, 11, article number 101638. doi: 10.1016/j.ssaho.2025.101638.
  17. Rwodzi, C., & De Jager, L. (2021). Resilient English teachers’ use of remote teaching and learning strategies in Gauteng resource-constrained township secondary schools. Perspectives in Education, 39(3), 62-78.
  18. Tafazoli, D., & Meihami, H. (2023). Narrative inquiry for CALL teacher preparation programs amidst the COVID-19 pandemic: Language teachers’ technological needs and suggestions. Journal of Computers in Education, 10(1), 163-187. doi: 10.1007/s40692-022-00227-x.
  19. Venkatesh, V., Morris, M.G., Davis, G.B., & Davis, F.D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425-478. doi: 10.2307/30036540.
  20. WMA. (2024). WMA Declaration of Helsinki – ethical principles for medical research involving human participants. Retrieved from https://www.wma.net/policies-post/wma-declaration-of-helsinki/.
  21. Xu, S., Chen, P., & Zhang, G. (2024). Exploring Chinese university educators’ acceptance and intention to use AI tools: An application of the UTAUT2 model. SAGE Open, 14(4). doi: 10.1177/21582440241290013.