MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402097471 · doi:10.5430/wjel.v15n1p129

Evaluating English Teachers’ Artificial Intelligence Readiness and Training Needs with a TPACK-Based Model

2024· article· en· W4402097471 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Journal of English Language · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicOnline Learning and Analytics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTraining (meteorology)Computer scienceMathematics educationArtificial intelligencePsychologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the rapid development and widespread adoption of artificial intelligence (AI) tools, the implementation of instructional pedagogy has transformed significantly. English teachers need to understand how AI tools can improve their teaching and must acquire the necessary technical and pedagogical knowledge to effectively utilize AI technology. Although the integration of AI into language teaching shows potential benefits, there remains a dearth of comprehensive research on English teachers’ perceptions, readiness, and professional development requirements in relation to AI.To address these knowledge research gaps, our study aims to evaluate English teachers’ current understanding of AI tools and their training needs for integrating AI into the English language classroom. Our proposed model uses the technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) framework, which incorporates English language teaching and information literacy contexts. This framework allows for a holistic assessment of teachers’ readiness for integrating AI within English language teaching practices.A study was conducted with a class of preservice English teachers in Hong Kong. An online survey was designed to assess the readiness of English teachers for applying AI tools in the classroom as well as their understanding and level of information literacy. This study helped identify and address potential issues with the survey before launching it to a wider audience. Our findings confirmed the validity and reliability of the instrument and indicated that preservice English teacher participants are generally prepared to integrate AI tools into the English classroom. Corelation analysis was also conducted to assess the relationships among the constructs and showed that technological pedagogical knowledge (TPK) and instructional literacy (IL) were significant predictors of the overall TPACK construct. The study suggested professional training in the selection, implementation and progress monitoring of specific AI tools for English Language teaching; pedagogy design; and the ability to search for appropriate resources for the English classroom. The framework can be enhanced by using a mixed-method approach and incorporating a qualitative study to triangulate the findings. An explanatory sequential design will be recommended to collect quantitative data first, then qualitative data will be collected for further analysis.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.730
Threshold uncertainty score0.530

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.044
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.285 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it