Validation of Pre-Service Chemistry Teachers’ Acceptance and Use Of Generative Artificial Intelligence Scale: Confirmatory Factor Analysis
DOI:
10.29303/cep.v9i1.11992Published:
2026-05-31Downloads
Abstract
The rapid development of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) is transforming educational practices by enabling new forms of knowledge construction, problem-solving, and instructional support. Its growing integration into academic contexts has raised important questions about how future teachers perceive and adopt these technologies. This study aims to examine pre-service chemistry teachers’ attitudes and use of GenAI by integrating the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology 2 (UTAUT2) and the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) within a validated framework. A quantitative cross-sectional survey was conducted with 240 Generation Z pre-service teachers using a structured questionnaire covering constructs such as performance expectancy, effort expectancy, social norms, facilitating conditions, habit, attitude, perceived behavioral control, behavioral intention, and AI use. Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) was applied to test both first-order and second-order models. The findings indicate that the proposed model achieved acceptable goodness-of-fit and strong reliability and validity across constructs. Performance expectancy, effort expectancy, and social norms significantly influenced attitudes and behavioral intention, while facilitating conditions and perceived behavioral control supported AI use. Behavioral intention emerged as the strongest predictor of use. Overall, the study highlights that AI adoption is shaped by interconnected psychological, social, and contextual factors, emphasizing the need for holistic teacher education strategies.
Keywords:
Generative Artificial Intelligence Pre-service Chemistry Teachers UTAUT2 TPB Confirmatory Factor AnalysisReferences
Abdaljaleel, M., Barakat, M., Alsanafi, M., Salim, N. A., Abazid, H., Malaeb, D., ... & Sallam, M. (2023). Factors influencing attitudes of university students towards ChatGPT and its usage: a multi-national study validating the TAME-ChatGPT survey instrument.
Albadarin, Y., Saqr, M., Pope, N., & Tukiainen, M. (2024). A systematic literature review of empirical research on ChatGPT in education. Discover Education, 3(1), 60.
Arbulú Ballesteros, M. A., Acosta Enríquez, B. G., Ramos Farroñán, E. V., García Juárez, H. D., Cruz Salinas, L. E., Blas Sánchez, J. E., ... & Farfán Chilicaus, G. C. (2024). The sustainable integration of AI in higher education: analyzing ChatGPT acceptance factors through an extended UTAUT2 framework in Peruvian universities. Sustainability, 16(23), 10707.
Bas, C., & Kiraz, A. (2025). Primary school teachers’ needs for AI-supported STEM education. Sustainability, 17(15), 7044.
Cetin, P. S., Eymur, G., & Erenler, S. (2024). The development of pre-service teachers’ argumentation self-efficacy through argumentation-based chemistry instruction. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 25(3), 895-907.
Chun, Z., Ning, Y., Chen, J., & Wijaya, T. T. (2025). Exploring the interplay among artificial intelligence literacy, creativity, self-efficacy, and academic achievement in college students: Findings from PLS-SEM and FsQCA. Education and Information Technologies, 1-34.
Çolak Yazıcı, S. (2026). Is knowing technology enough? Barriers and perceptions of prospective teachers towards the use of technology in chemistry courses. Research in Science & Technological Education, 1-23.
Fischer, H. E., Boone, W. J., & Neumann, K. (2023). Quantitative research designs and approaches. In Handbook of research on science education (pp. 28-59). Routledge.
García-López, I. M., González, C. S. G., Ramírez-Montoya, M. S., & Molina-Espinosa, J. M. (2025). Challenges of implementing ChatGPT on education: Systematic literature review. International Journal of Educational Research Open, 8, 100401.
Görgülü, D., Coşkun, F., Demi̇r, M., & Si̇pahi̇oğlu, M. (2025). A psychometric analysis of the artificial intelligence skills scale developed through chat gpt. Education and Information Technologies, 1-28.
Grassini, S., Aasen, M. L., & Møgelvang, A. (2024). Understanding university students’ acceptance of ChatGPT: Insights from the UTAUT2 model. Applied Artificial Intelligence, 38(1), 2371168.
Greitemeyer, T., & Kastenmüller, A. (2024). A longitudinal analysis of the willingness to use ChatGPT for academic cheating: Applying the theory of planned behavior.
Gümüş, M. M., & Mehmet, K. A. R. A. (2025). Development and validation of the Generative AI Literacy for Learning Scale (GenAI-LLs). Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 41(4), 1-16.
Habibi, A., Mukminin, A., Octavia, A., Wahyuni, S., Danibao, B. K., & Wibowo, Y. G. (2024). ChatGPT acceptance and use through UTAUT and TPB: A big survey in five Indonesian Universities. Social Sciences & Humanities Open, 10, 101136.
Hasan, F. F., & Bakar, M. S. A. (2022, October). From Google Forms to data repository: A new methodology in data collecting, data transforming, and information systems evaluation. In 2022 International Symposium on Multidisciplinary Studies and Innovative Technologies (ISMSIT) (pp. 710-714). IEEE.
Hodge, S. R. (2020). Quantitative research. In Routledge handbook of adapted physical education (pp. 147-162). Routledge.
Ilić, J., Ivanović, M., & Klašnja-Milićević, A. (2024, November). The Impact of ChatGPT on Student Learning Experience in Higher STEM Education: A Systematic Literature Review. In 2024 21st International Conference on Information Technology Based Higher Education and Training (ITHET) (pp. 1-9). IEEE.
Jaiswal, A. (2024). Google Form. In Open Electronic Data Capture Tools for Medical and Biomedical Research and Medical Allied Professionals (pp. 331-378). Academic Press.
Köhler, C., & Hartig, J. (2024). ChatGPT in higher education: Measurement instruments to assess student knowledge, usage, and attitude. Contemporary educational technology, 16(4), ep528.
Küchemann, S., Rau, M., Schmidt, A., & Kuhn, J. (2024). ChatGPT's quality: Reliability and validity of concept inventory items. Frontiers in Psychology, 15, 1426209.
Lee, H. Y., Huang, Y. M., & Wu, T. T. (2025). ChatGPT in education: A systematic review of current landscape, limitations and future directions through general system theory lens. European Journal of Education, 60(4), e70262.
Leon, C., Lipuma, J., & Oviedo-Torres, X. (2025, July). Artificial intelligence in STEM education: A transdisciplinary framework for engagement and innovation. In Frontiers in Education (Vol. 10, p. 1619888). Frontiers Media SA.
Karaca, A. (2025). Examinatıon of Generation Z Pre-Service Teachers' Global Literacy Levels in Terms of Different Variables. Scientific Educational Studies, 9(1), 28-49.
Luo, S., & Zou, D. (2025). University Learners' Readiness for ChatGPT‐Assisted English Learning: Scale Development and Validation. European Journal of Education, 60(1), e12886.
Merzifonluoglu, A., & Gunes, H. (2025). Shifting Dynamics: Who Holds the Reins in Decision‐Making With Artificial Intelligence Tools? Perspectives of Gen Z Pre‐Service Teachers. European Journal of Education, 60(1), e70053.
Montenegro-Rueda, M., Fernández-Cerero, J., Fernández-Batanero, J. M., & López-Meneses, E. (2023). Impact of the implementation of ChatGPT in education: A systematic review. Computers, 12(8), 153.
Nemt-Allah, M., Khalifa, W., Badawy, M., Elbably, Y., & Ibrahim, A. (2024). Validating the ChatGPT Usage Scale: psychometric properties and factor structures among postgraduate students. BMC psychology, 12(1), 497.
Ning, Y., Zhang, W., Yao, D., Fang, B., Xu, B., & Wijaya, T. T. (2025). Development and validation of the artificial intelligence literacy scale for teachers (AILST). Education and Information Technologies, 1-35.
Ningthias, D. P., & Qudratuddarsi, H. (2025). Validation of Instrument to Measure Science Pre-Service Teachers Digital Skills: Confirmatory Factor Analysis. Jurnal Pijar Mipa, 20(7), 1296-1301.
Obilor, E. I. (2023). Convenience and purposive sampling techniques: Are they the same. International Journal of Innovative Social & Science Education Research, 11(1), 1-7.
Perera, P., Kulathunga, V. K., Perera, N. N., Gunarathna, A., Jayasinghe, P. S. K., & Rajamanthri, L. (2025). Adoption of ChatGPT in higher education: a systematic literature review of lecturers’ perspective based on UTAUT2. Asian Education and Development Studies, 1-25.
Pérez, G., Henderson, T., Pierre, T., Marvez, G. R., Vasquez, A., Eshun, P., & Polanco Pino, Y. (2025). Subjective Intelligence: A Framework for Generative AI in STEM Education. Education Sciences, 15(12), 1571.
Qudratuddarsi, H., Meivawati, E., & Saputra, R. (2024). Pelatihan Penelitian Metode Kuantitatif dan Systematic Literature Review bagi Dosen dan Mahasiswa. Beru'-beru': Jurnal Pengabdian kepada Masyarakat, 3(1), 22-32.
Qudratuddarsi, H., & Meivawati, E. (2025). AI Acceptance And Use In Mathematics Pre-Service Teachers: A Theory Of Planned Behaviour Approach. Mathematics Education and Application Journal (META), 7(2), 71-82.
Ramírez, A., Burgos-Benavides, L., Sinchi, H., Quito-Calle, J. V., Díez, F. H., & Rodríguez-Díaz, F. J. (2025). Adaptation and validation of psychological assessment questionnaires using confirmatory factor analysis: A tutorial for planning and reporting analysis.
Rogers, P. (2024). Best practices for your confirmatory factor analysis: A JASP and lavaan tutorial. Behavior research methods, 56(7), 6634-6654.
Serra, L., Alves, J. M., & Pinheiro, G. (2025). Development and validation of a scale to measure students’ feelings about school: An exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis approach. American Journal of Education and Learning, 10(2), 190-206.
Ulum, N. H., Basuki, A., & Eliasa, E. I. (2023). Use of Google Forms as an Instrument for Assessment of Student Needs. Journal of Education Policy Analysis, 1(1), 14-22.
Valeri, F., Nilsson, P., & Cederqvist, A. M. (2025). Exploring students’ experience of ChatGPT in STEM education. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 8, 100360.
Zeeshan, K., Hämäläinen, T., & Neittaanmäki, P. (2024). ChatGPT for STEM Education: A Working Framework.
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Wahyuni Adam, Suci Rizkina Tari, Hilman Qudratuddarsi, Meili Yanti, Eli Meivawati
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with Chemistry Education Practice agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0 International License (CC-BY-SA License). This license allows authors to use all articles, data sets, graphics, and appendices in data mining applications, search engines, web sites, blogs, and other platforms by providing an appropriate reference. The journal allows the author(s) to hold the copyright without restrictions and will retain publishing rights without restrictions.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in Chemistry Education Practice.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
