Predicting Teachers' Behavioral Intention to Adopt Generative AI in Teaching: An Integrated TAM-UTAUT Regression Model
TL;DR
The findings indicate that teachers' adoption decisions are jointly driven by instrumental value and institutional provisioning, and that generalized technology anxiety is not, in itself, a barrier among teachers who already have practical exposure to GenAI.
Abstract
Generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) has entered classrooms faster than most institutions have been able to formulate policy, yet its instructional value ultimately depends on whether teachers choose to use it. This study examined the determinants of teachers' behavioral intention (BI) to use GenAI in teaching, drawing on an integrated Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) and Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) framework. Five predictors were specified: perceived ease of use (PEoU), perceived usefulness (PU), social influence (SI), facilitating conditions (FC), and anxiety (ANX). A cross-sectional survey was administered to 500 in-service teachers drawn from three Chinese educational institutions spanning medical higher education, vocational higher education, and primary education. Each construct was operationalized as a composite mean of its constituent items, and the model was estimated using the Regression module of SmartPLS 4 with bootstrapping (5,000 subsamples) to obtain confidence intervals. Collinearity diagnostics were acceptable (VIF = 1.046-1.238). The model accounted for 32.7% of the variance in behavioral intention (adjusted R² = .320). Perceived usefulness was the strongest predictor (β = .228, p < .001), followed by facilitating conditions (β = .206, p < .001), perceived ease of use (β = .198, p < .001), and social influence (β = .195, p < .001). Contrary to expectations, anxiety exerted no significant effect (β = .018, p = .631), with a bootstrap confidence interval that spanned zero. The findings indicate that teachers' adoption decisions are jointly driven by instrumental value and institutional provisioning, and that generalized technology anxiety is not, in itself, a barrier among teachers who already have practical exposure to GenAI. Implications for professional development design and institutional AI policy are discussed.
