e-ISSN: 2618-6586 Open Access · Peer-Reviewed JETOL on DergiPark
JETOL — Journal of Educational Technology & Online Learning
Publisher
Gürhan Durak
Publication Model
Periodical (January – May – September)
Status
Open for Submissions

Exploring pedagogical and ethical dimensions of AI use in EFL classrooms: teachers’ views from private high schools

Research Article

Download PDF DOI: 10.31681/jetol.1744526
Pages
409–428
Publication Date
December 30, 2025
Submission Date
July 17, 2025
Acceptance Date
December 11, 2025
Subjects
Instructional Technologies

Abstract

This study examines EFL teachers' perceptions regarding the pedagogical benefits, ethical dilemmas, and institutional challenges associated with the implementation of AI tools in language classes. The research was conducted at private high schools in a small city, Türkiye, employing a qualitative design within a constructivist framework. Ten teachers were selected through purposive sampling to ensure a diverse array of experiences and expertise with AI tools. Subsequently, they were interviewed using a semi-structured format. Reflexive thematic analysis identified three primary themes: perceived instructional advantages, ethical concerns, and institutional limits. Although educators commended AI for its capacity to assist in lesson design, foster student autonomy, and enhance engagement, they also voiced concerns around data privacy, academic integrity, and students' excessive reliance on AI. Inadequate policies, lack of managerial support, and insufficient professional development opportunities were institutional challenges that hindered the successful utilization of AI. The findings indicate that educators necessitate clear regulations from their institutions, continuous professional support, and ethical frameworks to utilize AI tools responsibly in language instruction.

Keywords

  • • Artificial Intelligence
  • Language education
  • EFL teachers perceptions
References (56)
  1. Alam, A., & Mohanty, A. (2022). Foundation for the Future of Higher Education or ‘Misplaced Optimism’? Being Human in the Age of Artificial Intelligence. Communications in Computer and Information Science, 1737 CCIS. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-23233-6_2
  2. Almegren, A., Almegren, R. M., Hazaea, A. N., Mahdi, H. S., & Ali, J. K. M. (2025). AI powered ELT: Instructors’ transformative roles and opportunities. PLOS ONE, 20(5), e0324910. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0324910
  3. Alvarado, R. (2023). AI as an epistemic technology. Science and Engineering Ethics, 29(32).
  4. Ashok, M., Madan, R., Joha, A., & Sivarajah, U. (2022). Ethical framework for artificial intelligence and digital technologies. International Journal of Information Management, 62, Article 102433.
  5. Biesta, G. J. J. (2015). Good education in an age of measurement: Ethics, politics, democracy. Routledge.
  6. Bin-Hady, W. R. A., & Ali, J. K. M. (2024). A study of Yemeni EFL students’ perceptions on the role of learning technologies in developing creativity and autonomy. Library Hi Tech. https://doi.org/10.1108/LHT-08-2023-0373
  7. Bostrom, N., & Yudkowsky, E. (2014). The ethics of artificial intelligence. The Cambridge Handbook of Artificial Intelligence (pp. 316–334). https://doi.org/10.1017/ Cbo978113904685
  8. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77-101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
  9. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2021). Thematic analysis: A practical guide. SAGE.
  10. Bruner, J. S. (1996). The culture of education. Harvard University Press.
  11. Brindley, G. (1998). Outcomes-based assessment and reporting in language learning programmes: A review of the issues. Language Testing, 15(1), 45–85.
  12. Brindley, G. (2001). Outcomes-based assessment in practice: Some examples and emerging insights. Language Testing, 18(4), 393–407.
  13. Cong-Lem, N., Tran, T. N., & Nguyen, T. T. (2024). Academic integrity in the age of generative AI: Perceptions and responses of Vietnamese EFL teachers. Teaching English with Technology, 24(1), 28–47.
  14. Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods approaches (4th ed.). SAGE Publications, Inc.
  15. Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.
  16. Dede, C. (2014). The role of digital technologies in deeper learning. Students at the Center: Deeper Learning Research Series. Jobs for the Future.
  17. Elo, S., Kääriäinen, M., Kanste, O., Pölkki, T., Utriainen, K., & Kyngäs, H. (2014). Qualitative content analysis: A focus on trustworthiness. SAGE Open, 4(1), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244014522633
  18. Finlay, L. (2021). Thematic analysis: The ‘Good’, the ‘Bad’ and the ‘Ugly’. European Journal for Qualitative Research in Psychotherapy, 11, 103–116.
  19. Floridi, L. (2018). Soft ethics, the governance of the digital and the General Data Protection Regulation. Philosophical Transactions Series A Mathematical, Physical, and Engineering Sciences, 376(2133), Article 20180081. https://doi.org/10.1098/ rsta.2018.0081
  20. Fullan, M. (2007). The new meaning of educational change (4th ed.). Teachers College Press.
  21. Geertz, C. (1973). The interpretation of cultures: Selected essays. Basic Books.
  22. Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1994). Competing paradigms in qualitative research. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 105–117). Sage.
  23. Hargreaves, A. (2020). Moving: A memoir of education and social mobility. Solution Tree Press.
  24. Holmes, W., Bialik, M., & Fadel, C. (2019). Artificial intelligence in education: Promises and implications for teaching and learning. Center for Curriculum Redesign.
  25. Hosseini, M., Resnik, D. B., & Holmes, K. (2023). The ethics of disclosing the use of artificial intelligence in tools writing scholarly manuscripts. Research Ethics. https://doi.org/10.1177/17470161231180449
  26. Hwang, G. J., Xie, H., Wah, B. W., & Gaˇsevi´c, D. (2020). Visiоn, challenges, rоles and research issues оf Artificial Intelligence in Educatiоn. Cоmputers and Educatiоn: Artificial Intelligence, 1, 100001. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. caeai.2020.100001
  27. Hwang, W. et al. (2023). AI and Recognition Technologies to Facilitate English as Foreign Language Writing for Supporting Personalization and Contextualization in Authentic Contexts. Journal of Educational Computing Research 61(5).
  28. Karlsson, C. (2003). Spatial ICT clusters in Sweden – An empirical method to identify a necessary condition for existence [Conference paper]. ERSA 2003: European Regional Science Association Conference. https://ideas.repec.org/p/wiw/wiwrsa/ersa03p222.html
  29. Korkmaz, H., & Akbıyık, M. (2024). Unlocking the potential: Attitudes of tertiary level EFL learners towards using AI in language learning. Participatory Educational Research, 11(6), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.17275/per.24.76.11.6
  30. Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. SAGE Publications.
  31. Luckin, R., Holmes, W., Griffiths, M., & Forcier, L. B. (2022). Intelligence unleashed: An argument for AI in education (Updated ed.). Pearson Education.
  32. Marin, L., & Georgescu, S. (2020). Intelligent systems and prediction of educational performance: Techniques and applications. University of Bucharest Publishing House.
  33. Mackenzie, N., & Knipe, S. (2006). Research dilemmas: Paradigms, methods and methodology. Issues in Educational Research, 16, 193-205.
  34. Meniado, J. (2023). The Impact of ChatGPT on English Language Teaching, Learning, and Assessment: A Rapid Review of Literature. Arab World English Journal, 14 (4). 3–18. https://dx.doi.org/10.24093/awej/vol14no4.1
  35. Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. Jossey-Bass.
  36. Mitchell, M. (2019). Artificial intelligence: A guide for thinking humans. Picador.
  37. Nowell, L. S., Norris, J. M., White, D. E., & Moules, N. J. (2017). Thematic analysis: Striving to meet the trustworthiness criteria. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 16(1), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406917733847
  38. Pando, M., León, M., Dougherty, C. A., & del Rosal, K. (2025). Exploring dual language teachers’ experiences, perceptions and pedagogical implications of ChatGPT in emergent bilingual education. Bilingual Research Journal, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/15235882.2025.2478499
  39. Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Sage Publications.
  40. Peer Mohamed, M. S. (2024). Exploring ethical dimensions of AI-enhanced language education: A literature perspective. Technology in Language Teaching & Learning, 6(3), 89-99. https://doi.org/10.29140/tltl.v6n3.1813
  41. Popescu, M. (2022). Artificial intelligence in education: Ethical challenges and opportunities. Technological Publishing House.
  42. Priestley, M., Biesta, G. J. J., & Robinson, S. (2015). Teacher agency: What is it and why does it matter? In R. Kneyber & J. Evers (Eds.), Flip the system: Changing education from the bottom up (pp. 134–148). Routledge.
  43. Rohde, F., Gossen, M., Wagner, J., & Santarius, T. (2021). Sustainability challenges of artificial intelligence and policy implications. ÖkologischesWirtschaften, 36(O1), 36–40.
  44. Selwyn, N. (2016). Education and technology: Key issues and debates (2nd ed.). Bloomsbury.
  45. Shabara, R., ElEbyary, K., & Boraie, D. (2024). Teachers or ChatGPT: The issue of accuracy and Consistency in L2 assessment. Teaching English with Technology, 24(2), 71–92. https://doi.org/10.56297/vaca6841/LRDX3699/XSEZ5215
  46. Spady, W. G. (1994). Outcome-based education: Critical issues and answers. American Association of School Administrators.
  47. Uwosomah, E. E., & Dooly, M. (2025). It is not the huge enemy: Preservice teachers’ evolving perspectives on AI. Education Sciences, 15(2), 152. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15020152
  48. Vaccino-Salvadore, Silvia. 2023. Exploring the Ethical Dimensions of Using ChatGPT in Language Learning and Beyond. Languages 8, 191.
  49. Vică, C. (2023). Algorithmic civilization and life in the digital world. University of Bucharest Publishing House.
  50. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
  51. Wei, L. (2023). Artificial intelligence in language instruction: Impact on English learning achievement, L2 motivation, and self-regulated learning. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, Article 1261955. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1261955
  52. Yagi, M., Yamanouchi, K., Fujita, N., Funao, H., & Ebata, S. (2023). Revolutionizing spinal care: Current applications and future directions of artificial intelligence and machine learning. Journal of Clinical Medicine, 12(13), 4188
  53. Yedjou, C. G., Tchakoua, C. T., Tchounwou, M., Latinwo, L., Eidahl, K., Alo, R. A., & Liu, H. (2024). Recent advances in artificial intelligence (AI) in education, ethical concerns and implications. International Journal of Science Academic Research, 5(2), 7027–7030.
  54. Yen, P. H., Thu, H. T. A., Thi, N. A., Tra, N. H., Thao, L. T., & Thuy, P. T. (2024). University teachers’ perceptions on the integration of ChatGPT in language education assessment: Challenges, benefits, and ethical considerations. In Proceedings of the 2024 International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education (pp. 7-21). Atlantis Press.
  55. Zawacki-Richter, O., Marín, V. I., Bond, M., & Gouverneur, F. (2019). Systematic review of research on artificial intelligence applications in higher education – Where are the educators? International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 16(1), 39.
  56. Zuboff, S. (2019). The age of surveillance capitalism: The fight for a human future at the new frontier of power. Profile Books.

This article is published under the CC BY 4.0 license.