Attitudes towards and expectations on the role of artificial intelligence in the classroom among digitally skilled Finnish K-12 mathematics teachers

Ray Pörn; Mats Braskén; Mattias Wingren; Sören Andersson

doi:10.31129/LUMAT.12.3.2102

Authors

Ray Pörn Faculty of Technology and Seafaring, Novia University of Applied Sciences, Vaasa, Finland https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5665-6031
Mats Braskén Faculty of Education and Welfare Studies, Åbo Akademi University, Vaasa, Finland https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4610-1689
Mattias Wingren Experience Lab, Faculty of Education and Welfare Studies, Åbo Akademi University, Vaasa, Finland
Sören Andersson Experience Lab, Faculty of Education and Welfare Studies, Åbo Akademi University, Vaasa, Finland https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0418-185X

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.31129/LUMAT.12.3.2102

Keywords:

Artificial intelligence, AI education, K-12 mathematics education, Teachers attitudes

Abstract

The growing impact and importance of artificial intelligence in society has led to an increasing interest for the potential of artificial intelligence as an educational tool in schools to aid both students and teachers. In this study we investigate digitally skilled K-12 mathematics teachers’ (N=85) attitudes towards and expectations on the role of artificial intelligence in the classroom. The study was done by conducting and analyzing the results of a web-based survey among Swedish and Finnish speaking mathematics teachers using a mixed methods strategy. The Will, Skill and Tool framework was used for the analysis. The survey was done before the introduction of ChatGPT-3. The results indicate that the teachers’ attitudes toward AI tools in school are characterized by interest, openness, and awareness. Teachers have a balanced view on the possibilities and risks of AI use in school. However, the teachers also stress that there is a risk that AI tools will shift the focus from learning key mathematical skills towards learning and interaction with the AI tools themselves. The research concluded that the K-12 mathematics teachers surveyed have broad experience with digital tools and will likely become early adopters of AI tools in the classroom.

References

Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T

Aleven, V., McLaren, B. M., & Sewall, J. (2009). Scaling Up Programming by Demonstration for Intelligent Tutoring Systems Development: An Open-Access Web Site for Middle School Mathematics Learning. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 2(2), 64–78. https://doi.org/10.1109/TLT.2009.22

Ayanwale, M. A., Sanusi, I. T., Adelana, O. P., Aruleba, K. D., & Oyelere, S. S. (2022). Teachers’ readiness and intention to teach artificial intelligence in schools. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 3. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2022.100099

Bryman, A. (2016). Social Research Methods (Fifth edition). Oxford University Press.

Celik, I. (2023). Towards Intelligent-TPACK: An empirical study on teachers’ professional knowledge to ethically integrate artificial intelligence (AI)-based tools into education. Com-puters in Human Behavior, 138, 107468. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2022.107468

Cetin, I., & Ozden, M. Y. (2015). Development of computer programming attitude scale for uni-versity students. Computer Applications in Engineering Education, 23(5), 667–672. https://doi.org/10.1002/cae.21639

Chai, C. S., Ling Koh, J. H., Tsai, C.-C., & Lee Wee Tan, L. (2011). Modeling primary school pre-service teachers’ Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) for meaningful learning with information and communication technology (ICT). Computers & Education, 57(1), 1184–1193. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.01.007

Elements of AI. (n.d.). Retrieved June 19, 2023, from https://www.elementsofai.com/

Farrokhnia, M., Banihashem, S. K., Noroozi, O., & Wals, A. (2023). A SWOT analysis of ChatGPT: Implications for educational practice and research. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2023.2195846

Hemmi, K., Krzywacki, H., & Koljonen, T. (2018). Investigating Finnish Teacher Guides as a Re-source for Mathematics Teaching. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 62(6), 911–928. https://doi.org/10.1080/00313831.2017.1307278

Holmes, W., Bialik, M., & Fadel, C. (2019). Artificial intelligence in education – Promises and implications for teaching and learning. The Center for Curriculum Redesign.

Hoyles, C. (2018). Transforming the mathematical practices of learners and teachers through digi-tal technology. Research in Mathematics Education, 20(3), 209–228. https://doi.org/10.1080/14794802.2018.1484799

Hwang, G.-J., Xie, H., Wah, B. W., & Gašević, D. (2020). Vision, challenges, roles and research issues of Artificial Intelligence in Education. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelli-gence, 1, 100001. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2020.100001

Jolliffe, I. T., & Cadima, J. (2016). Principal component analysis: a review and recent develop-ments. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and En-gineering Sciences, 374(2065), 20150202. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2015.0202

Kasneci, E., Sessler, K., Küchemann, S., Bannert, M., Dementieva, D., Fischer, F., Gasser, U., Groh, G., Günnemann, S., Hüllermeier, E., Krusche, S., Kutyniok, G., Michaeli, T., Nerdel, C., Pfeffer, J., Poquet, O., Sailer, M., Schmidt, A., Seidel, T., … Kasneci, G. (2023). ChatGPT for good? On opportunities and challenges of large language models for education. Learning and Individual Differences, 103, 102274. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2023.102274

Kay, J. (2012). AI and Education: Grand Challenges. IEEE Intelligent Systems, 27(5), 66–69. https://doi.org/10.1109/MIS.2012.92

Kim, S., Jang, Y., Choi, S., Kim, W., Jung, H., Kim, S., & Kim, H. (2021). Analyzing Teacher Competency with TPACK for K-12 AI Education. KI - Künstliche Intelligenz, 35(2), 139–151. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13218-021-00731-9

Knezek, G., & Christensen, R. (2016). Extending the will, skill, tool model of technology integra-tion: adding pedagogy as a new model construct. Journal of Computing in Higher Educa-tion, 28(3), 307–325. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-016-9120-2

Knezek, G., Christensen, R., & Fluke, R. (2013). Testing a will, skill, tool model of technology in-tegration. Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association (AERA).

Latifah, R., Budiyanto, C. W., & Saputro, H. (2022). Digital Transformation Readiness in Educa-tion: A Review. International Journal of Information and Education Technology, 12(8), 809–815. https://doi.org/10.18178/ijiet.2022.12.8.1688

Lin, P., & Van Brummelen, J. (2021). Engaging Teachers to Co-Design Integrated AI Curriculum for K-12 Classrooms. Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Compu-ting Systems, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1145/3411764.3445377

Lindner, A., & Berges, M. (2020). Can you explain AI to me? Teachers’ pre-concepts about Artifi-cial Intelligence. 2020 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1109/FIE44824.2020.9274136

Lindner, A., & Romeike, R. (2019). Teachers’ perspectives on artificial intelligence. 12th Interna-tional Conference on Informatics.

Luckin, R., George, K., & Cukurova, M. (2022). AI for School Teachers. CRC Press. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781003193173

MathWorks - Makers of MATLAB and Simulink - MATLAB & Simulink. (n.d.). Retrieved January 13, 2023, from https://se.mathworks.com/

Ministry of Economic Affairs and Employment. (2019). Leading the way into the age of artificial intelligence: Final report of Finland’s Artificial Intelligence Programme 2019. http://urn.fi/URN:ISBN:978-952-327-437-2

Norman, G. (2010). Likert scales, levels of measurement and the “laws” of statistics. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 15(5), 625–632. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-010-9222-y

Petko, D. (2012). Teachers’ pedagogical beliefs and their use of digital media in classrooms: Sharpening the focus of the ‘will, skill, tool’ model and integrating teachers’ constructivist orientations. Computers & Education, 58(4), 1351–1359. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.12.013

Peterson, R. A. (2000). A Meta-Analysis of Variance Accounted for and Factor Loadings in Ex-ploratory Factor Analysis. Marketing Letters, 11(3), 261–275. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008191211004

Polak, S., Schiavo, G., & Zancanaro, M. (2022). Teachers’ Perspective on Artificial Intelligence Education: an Initial Investigation. CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Sys-tems Extended Abstracts, 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1145/3491101.3519866

ReadyAI. (n.d.). Retrieved June 19, 2023, from https://medium.com/readyai-org

Rudolph, J., Tan, S., & Tan, S. (2023). ChatGPT: Bullshit spewer or the end of traditional assess-ments in higher education? Journal of Applied Learning & Teaching, 6(1). https://doi.org/10.37074/jalt.2023.6.1.9

Touretzky, D., Gardner-McCune, C., Martin, F., & Seehorn, D. (2019). Envisioning AI for K-12: What Should Every Child Know about AI? Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 33(01), 9795–9799. https://doi.org/10.1609/aaai.v33i01.33019795

Vuorikari, R., Kluzer, S., & Punie, Y. (2022). DigComp 2.2 - The Digital Competence Framework for Citizens. https://doi.org/10.2760/115376

Zawacki-Richter, O., Marín, V. I., Bond, M., & Gouverneur, F. (2019). Systematic review of re-search on artificial intelligence applications in higher education – where are the educators? International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 16(1), 39. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-019-0171-0

Zimmerman, M. (2018). Teaching AI: Exploring new frontiers for learning. International Society for Technology in Education.