We still have not prepared yet: Indonesian Rural Teacher Perception in Teaching English Using AI
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.22437/proca.v2i1.53265Keywords:
Rural teacher, artificial intelligence, teaching EnglishAbstract
Background: teachers in rural areas, in particular, are at the forefront of this technological revolution, where exposure, institutional support, and connectivity are still uneven.. Objective: problems of rural teachers deal with slower internet, fewer devices, and less formal training, while urban schools are experimenting with AI-based platforms. Seldom do government efforts to digitize education reach the periphery as deeply. Methods: this study used a convergent mixed-methods approach. This research is a mixed design reflects the belief that technological readiness is a human experience influenced by context and meaning rather than just a statistical condition. While qualitative insights were acquired to understand how such preparedness is lived and told in everyday educational life, quantitative data was gathered to measure the structural elements of teachers' readiness. Results: The findings ramifications emphasize the necessity of policy frameworks that put fairness and contextual sensitivity ahead of uniform technological advancement. Initiatives pertaining to AI should be adapted to local conditions, especially by guaranteeing long-term access to infrastructure, dependable internet, and reasonably priced digital resources in rural areas. Conclusion: rural English teachers remain struggle with the situation of inadequate infrastructure in the area.
Downloads
References
1. Kritandani W, Aryani R, Rakasiwi T. A Report Review: Artificial Intelligence and the Future of Teaching and Learning. Int Res Educ J. 2024;6(2):245.
2. Ali I, Warraich NF, Butt K. Acceptance and use of artificial intelligence and AI-based applications in education: A meta-analysis and future direction. Inf Dev. 2025;41(3 Special Issue: “Artificial Intelligence initiatives”):859–74.
3. Niemi H, Pea RD, Lu Y. AI in Learning: Designing the Future. AI in Learning: Designing the Future. 2022. 1–344 p.
4. OECD. Empowering Learners for the Age of AI: An AI Literacy Framework for Primary and Secondary Education [Internet]. Paris; 2025. Available from: https://ailiteracyframework.org
5. Adigun OT, Tijani FA, Haihambo CK, Enock SL. Understanding pre-service teachers’ intention to adopt and use artificial intelligence in Nigerian inclusive classrooms. Front Educ. 2025;10.
6. Pan F. AI in language teaching, learning, and assessment. AI in Language Teaching, Learning, and Assessment. 2024. 1–384 p.
7. Zhao J, Li S, Zhang J. Understanding Teachers’ Adoption of AI Technologies: An Empirical Study from Chinese Middle Schools. Systems. 2025;13(4):1–19.
8. Lu W, Lin C. Meta-Analysis of Influencing Factors on the Use of Artificial Intelligence in Education. Asia-Pacific Educ Res [Internet]. 2025;34(2):617–27. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-024-00883-w
9. Ho CW. A Study on Integrating Artificial Intelligence into Teaching Activities in Rural Communities for Elementary School Students. Int J Inf Educ Technol. 2025;15(6):1144–9.
10. Parviz M, Arthur F. Exploring EFL Teachers’ Behavioral Intentions to Integrate GenAI Applications: Insights From PLS-SEM and fsQCA. Hum Behav Emerg Technol. 2025;2025(1).
11. Saihi A, Ben-Daya M, Hariga M. The moderating role of technology proficiency and academic discipline in AI-chatbot adoption within higher education: Insights from a PLS-SEM analysis [Internet]. Vol. 30, Education and Information Technologies. Springer US; 2025. 5843–5881 p. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-13023-0
12. García de Blanes Sebastián M, Sarmiento Guede JR, Antonovica A. Application and extension of the UTAUT2 model for determining behavioral intention factors in use of the artificial intelligence virtual assistants. Front Psychol. 2022;13.
13. Byrne D. A worked example of Braun and Clarke’s approach to reflexive thematic analysis. Qual Quant [Internet]. 2022;56(3):1391–412. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-021-01182-y
14. Farrokhnia M, Banihashem SK, Noroozi O. A SWOT analysis of ChatGPT : Implications for educational practice and research A SWOT analysis of ChatGPT : Implications for educational practice and research. Innov Educ Teach Int [Internet]. 2024;61(3):460–74. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2023.2195846
15. Jauhiainen JS, Guerra AG. Generative AI and ChatGPT in School Children’s Education: Evidence from a School Lesson. Sustain. 2023;15(18):1–22.
16. Lee B, Park D, Yoon J, Kim J. Better Data from AI Users: A Field Experiment on the Impacts of Robot Self-Disclosure on the Utterance of Child Users in Home Environment. Sensors. 2023;23(6).
17. Listyaningrum P, Retnawati H, Ibda H. Digital learning using ChatGPT in elementary school mathematics learning : a systematic literature review. 2024;36(3):1701–10.
18. Feng J, Yu B. Key factors influencing educational technology adoption in higher education : A systematic review. 2025; Available from: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pdig.0000764
19. Ley T, Tammets K, Sarmiento-márquez EM, Leoste J, Hallik M, Poom-valickis K, et al. Adopting technology in schools : modelling , measuring and supporting knowledge appropriation. Eur J Teach Educ [Internet]. 2021;00(00):1–24. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2021.1937113
20. Nassar AAM, Othman K, Azmir M, Mohd B. The Impact of the Social Influence on ICT Adoption : Behavioral Intention as Mediator and Age as Moderator The Impact of the Social Influence on ICT Adoption : Behavioural Intention as Mediator and Age as Moderator. 2019;9(11):963–78.
21. Venkatesh V. Adoption and Use of AI Tools: A Research Agenda Grounded in UTAUT. Ann Oper Res [Internet]. 2022;308:641–52. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-020-03918-9%0AADOPTION AND USE OF AI TOOLS:%0AA RESEARCH AGENDA GROUNDED IN UTAUT Viswanath Venkatesh%0APamplin College of Business Virginia Tech, Blacksburg VA 24061, USA%0Avvenkatesh@vvenkatesh.us 1
22. Cabero-Almenara J, Palacios-Rodríguez A, Loaiza-Aguirre MI, Rivas-Manzano M del R de. Acceptance of Educational Artificial Intelligence by Teachers and Its Relationship with Some Variables and Pedagogical Beliefs. Educ Sci. 2024;14(7).
23. Kim J, Lee H, Cho YH. Learning design to support student-AI collaboration: perspectives of leading teachers for AI in education [Internet]. Vol. 27, Education and Information Technologies. Springer US; 2022. 6069–6104 p. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10831-6
24. Kahnbach L, Hase A, Kuhl P, Lehr D. Explaining primary school teachers’ intention to use digital learning platforms for students’ individualized practice: comparison of the standard UTAUT and an extended model. Front Educ. 2024;9(May).
25. Velli K, Zafiropoulos K. Factors That Affect the Acceptance of Educational AI Tools by Greek Teachers—A Structural Equation Modelling Study. Eur J Investig Heal Psychol Educ. 2024;14(9):2560–79.
26. Nguyen HH, Nguyen VA. An Application of Model Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT): A Use Case for a System of Personalized Learning Based on Learning Styles. Int J Inf Educ Technol. 2024;14(11):1574–82.
27. Schmid U, Blanc B, Toepel M, Pinkwart N, Drachsler H. AI@Education: Teaching and learning at school with artificial intelligence tools. Dtsch Telekom Stift [Internet]. 2021;1. Available from: www.mmb-institut.de
28. Menon D, Shilpa K. “Chatting with ChatGPT”: Analyzing the factors influencing users’ intention to Use the Open AI’s ChatGPT using the UTAUT model. Heliyon [Internet]. 2023;9(11):e20962. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e20962
29. Zhang X, Wareewanich T. A Study of the Factors Influencing Teachers’ Willingness to Use Generative Artificial Intelligence Based on the UTAUT Model. Int J Interact Mob Technol. 2024;18(6):126–42.
30. Wardani DOK, Patindra G. Pedagogy in Artificial Intelligence : Optimizing Chatbots in the Learning of Indonesian Language and Literature Pedagogis dalam Artificial Intelligence : Optimalisasi Chatbot dalam Pembelajaran Bahasa dan Sastra Indonesia. Expert Exloration J Technol Educ Trends. 2025;2(1):1–8.
31. Mustafa F, Nguyen HTM, Gao X (Andy). The challenges and solutions of technology integration in rural schools: A systematic literature review. Int J Educ Res [Internet]. 2024;126(February):102380. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2024.102380
32. Baram E, Uygun E. Putting technological, pedagogical, and content knowledge (TPACK) in action: An integrated TPACK-design-(DBL) approach based learning. Australas J Educ Technol. 2016;32(2):47–63.
33. Rulyansah A, Ghufron S, Rihlah J, Hardiningrum A. Bridging the Digital Divide : Empowering Teachers with AI Tools in Rural Indonesian Schools. Indones Berdaya [Internet]. 2025;6(2):459–70. Available from: https://ukinstitute.org/journals/ib/article/view/1073/pdf?utm_
34. Duggan S. AI in Education: Change at the Speed of Learning. UNESCO IITE Policy Br [Internet]. 2020; Available from: https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000374947
35. Kim J, Wargo E. Empowering educational leaders for AI integration in rural STEM education: Challenges and strategies. Front Educ. 2025;10(April):1–13.
36. López Costa M. Artificial Intelligence and Data Literacy in Rural Schools’ Teaching Practices: Knowledge, Use, and Challenges. Educ Sci. 2025;15(3).
37. Jalil HA, Rajakumar M, Zaremohzzabieh Z. Teachers’ Acceptance of Technologies for 4IR Adoption: Implementation of the UTAUT Model. Int J Learn Teach Educ Res. 2022;21(1):18–32.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Eddy Haryanto, Diah Octavia Kusuma Wardani
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Published with license by LPPM Universitas Jambi. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0 International). This license enables reusers to distribute, remix, adapt, and build upon the material in any medium or format, so long as attribution is given to the creator.
