METAPHORICAL AND TAM-BASED PERCEPTIONS OF GENERATIVE AI AMONG HIGH SCHOOL EFL TEACHERS IN VIETNAM: A MIXED-METHODS INVESTIGATION

Thai Thi Thanh Tuyen

Abstract


The rapid emergence of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) tools has created both opportunities and challenges for teachers across educational contexts. While a growing body of research has examined GenAI integration in higher education and in Western settings, empirical evidence from secondary school teachers in Southeast Asia, particularly Vietnam, remains scarce. This study investigated high school English teachers’perceptions of integrating GenAI tools into teaching, focusing on three dimensions namely perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and ethical concerns. Employing a mixed-methods design, data were collected from English teachers at two public high schools in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam, through a single online questionnaire comprising a validated 15-item Likert-scale instrument and a metaphor elicitation task (N = 43). Quantitative data were analysed using descriptive statistics and reliability analysis, while qualitative data were subjected to Huang and Feng’s (2019) three-stage metaphorical analysis. The study was grounded in Davis’s (1989) Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) and drew on Lakoff and Johnson’s (1980) conceptual metaphor theory as a complementary analytical lens. Findings revealed a differentiated perceptual pattern: teachers reported the highest agreement with perceived usefulness (M = 4.13), followed by ethical concerns (M = 3.97), and perceived ease of use (M = 3.72). Metaphor analysis identified five conceptual categories, of which GenAI as an assistant was dominant (55.9%), complemented by knowledge resource, adaptive instrument, companion, and double-edged sword framings. The study contributes empirical evidence from a Vietnamese secondary school context and offers practical implications for professional development and institutional policy regarding GenAI integration.

Keywords


GenAI, teacher perceptions, Technology Acceptance Model, metaphor, high school

Full Text:

PDF

References


Aydogmus, M., & Arslantas, S. (2020). Prospective teachers’ metaphors as a lens to understand how they perceive ‘Web 2.0’. Research on Education and Media, 12(1), 58–68. https://doi.org/10.2478/rem-2020-0007

Bittle, K., & El-Gayar, O. (2025). Generative AI and academic integrity in higher education: A systematic review and research agenda. Information, 16(4), 296. https://doi.org/10.3390/info16040296

Choi, K. Y., Wu, C., & Moorhouse, B. L. (2025). Exploring the use of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) in English language teaching: Voices from in-service teachers at an early-adopting Hong Kong secondary school. Technology in Language Teaching & Learning, 7(3). https://doi.org/10.29140/tltl.v7n3.102516

Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). SAGE. Retrieved from https://books.google.ro/books/about/Research_Design.html?id=335ZDwAAQBAJ&redir_esc=y

Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008

De Guerrero, M. C. G., & Villamil, O. S. (2000). Activating the ZPD: Mutual scaffolding in L2 peer revision. The Modern Language Journal, 84(1), 51–68. https://doi.org/10.1111/0026-7902.00052

ElSayary, A., Kuhail, M. A., & Hojeij, Z. (2025). Examining the role of prompt engineering in utilizing generative AI tools for lesson planning: Insights from teachers’ experiences and perceptions. Human Behavior and Emerging Technologies, 2025. https://doi.org/10.1155/hbe2/9986139

Fisher, L. (2017). Researching learners’ and teachers’ beliefs about language learning and metaphor. In S. Wortham, D. Kim, & S. May (Eds.), Discourse and education: Encyclopedia of language and education (pp. 329–339). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-02243-7_17

George, D., & Mallery, P. (2003). SPSS for Windows step by step: A simple guide and reference (4th ed.). Allyn & Bacon. Retrieved from https://books.google.ro/books/about/SPSS_for_Windows_Step_by_Step.html?id=AghHAAAAMAAJ&redir_esc=y

Granic, A., & Marangunić, N. (2019). Technology acceptance model in educational context: A systematic literature review. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(5), 2572–2593. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12864

Hu, X., Gong, W., & Cortazzi, M. (2025). Researching China’s pre-service teachers’ perceptions of AI education for K–12: An elicited metaphor analysis. European Journal of Education, 60. https://doi.org/10.1111/ejed.70079

Huang, W., & Feng, D. (2019). Exploring the dynamics of motivation for learning Japanese among Chinese learners: An elicited metaphor analysis. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 40(7), 605–617. https://doi.org/10.1080/01434632.2019.1571071

Jiang, L., Huang, L., Wei, M., & Wang, R. (2026). Does generative AI narrow or widen performance gaps? A stratified quasi-experiment on reading-based continuation writing in senior high school English. Reading and Writing. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-026-10783-8

Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. University of Chicago Press. Retrieved from https://books.google.ro/books/about/Metaphors_We_Live_By.html?id=r6nOYYtxzUoC&redir_esc=y

Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 33(1), 159–174. https://doi.org/10.2307/2529310

Low, G. (2015). A practical validation model for researching elicited metaphor. In W. Wan & G. Low (Eds.), Elicited metaphor analysis in educational discourse (pp. 15–37). John Benjamins. Retrieved from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1075/milcc.3/html?srsltid=AfmBOorzWLzAJBEqoVTMI0lIPfq2DAt85AZvhFt7vpEXO8SOTHTT7Z_0

Meishar-Tal, H., Gedge, R., & Levin, E. (2025). Teacher’s use of generative AI: Comparing personal use and classroom integration. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 42(1), 4–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/21532974.2025.2583515

Nazim, M., & Alzubi, A. A. F. (2025). Empowering EFL teachers’ perceptions of generative AI-mediated self-professionalism. PLOS ONE, 20(6). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0326735

Ngoc, N., Sy, N., & Tai, N. (2025). Generative AI in English teaching and learning: A case study from Vietnam universities. In The Asian Conference on Education & International Development 2025 Official Conference Proceedings (pp. 287–302). IAFOR. https://doi.org/10.22492/issn.2189-101X.2025.24

Nguyen, H., Thanh, V. D. T., & Dinh, V. P. (2025). Bringing AI into teaching: Understanding Vietnamese teachers’ perspectives and pedagogical challenges. International Journal of Educational Methodology, 11(3), 335–347. https://doi.org/10.12973/ijem.11.3.335

Nhung, P. T. H., & Ha, N. T. T. (2025). EFL learners’ metaphorical perceptions of peer feedback in ICT-mediated collaborative writing. Arab World English Journal, Special Issue on CALL, 11, 81–95. https://dx.doi.org/10.24093/awej/call11.5

Okyar, H. (2023). University-level EFL students’ views on learning English online: A qualitative study. Education and Information Technologies, 28, 81–107. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11155-9

Saharuddin, M. H., Nasir, M. K. M., & Sofwan Mahmud, M. (2025). Exploring teachers’technological pedagogical content knowledge in utilising artificial intelligence (AI) for teaching. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 24(1), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.26803/ijlter.24.1.7

Schmitt, R. (2005). Systematic metaphor analysis as a method of qualitative research. The Qualitative Report, 10(2), 358–394. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2005.1854

Shankar, S. K., Pothancheri, G., Sasi, D., & Mishra, S. (2025). Bringing teachers in the loop: Exploring perspectives on integrating generative AI in technology-enhanced learning. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 35(1), 155–180. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-024-00428-8

Söderström, U., Hedström, E., Lambertsson, K., & Mejtoft, T. (2024). ChatGPT in education: Teachers’ and students’ views. In Proceedings of the European Conference on Cognitive Ergonomics 2024: Contributing to a Sustainable and Participatory Future (Article 32). Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/3673805.3673828

Tan, J., & Maravilla, J. (2024). Shaping integrity: Why generative artificial intelligence does not have to undermine education. Frontiers in Education, 9. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2024.1459131

Thong, C. L., Butson, R., & WeiLee, L. (2023). Understanding the impact of ChatGPT in education: Exploratory study on students’ attitudes, perception and ethics. In T. Cochrane, V. Narayan, C. Brown, K. MacCallum, E. Bone, C. Deneen, R. Vanderburg, & B. Hurren (Eds.), People, partnerships and pedagogies: Proceedings ASCILITE 2023 (pp. 234–243). https://doi.org/10.14742/apubs.2023.461

Wan, W., & Low, G. (2015). Introduction. In W. Wan & G. Low (Eds.), Elicited metaphor analysis in educational discourse (pp. 1–12). John Benjamins. Retrieved from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1075/milcc.3/html?srsltid=AfmBOorzWLzAJBEqoVTMI0lIPfq2DAt85AZvhFt7vpEXO8SOTHTT7Z_0

Wan, W., Low, G. D., & Li, M. (2011). From students’ and teachers’ perspectives: Metaphor analysis of beliefs about EFL teachers’ roles. System, 39(3), 403–415. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2011.07.006

Xuan, S. H., Nguyen, A. T., Nguyen, T., Nguyen, L., Nguyen, H., Pham, N., Phung, T., Ngo, B., Nguyen, V., Tran, M., Le, T., Nguyen, K., & FNU, P. (2025). Evaluating the impact of generative AI in mathematics education: A comparative study in Vietnamese high schools. Human Behavior and Emerging Technologies, 2025, Article 8886206. https://doi.org/10.1155/hbe2/8886206

Xue, L., Mahat, J., & Ghazali, N. (2026). Technology acceptance model in artificial intelligence in education: A meta-analysis. SAGE Open, 16(1), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440251409441

Yim, I. H. Y., & Wegerif, R. (2024). Teachers’ perceptions, attitudes, and acceptance of artificial intelligence educational learning tools: An exploratory study on artificial intelligence literacy for young students. Future in Educational Research, 2(4), 318–345. https://doi.org/10.1002/fer3.65




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.46827/ejes.v13i7.6821

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2026 Thai Thi Thanh Tuyen

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Copyright © 2015-2026. European Journal of Education Studies (ISSN 2501 - 1111) is a registered trademark of Open Access Publishing Group. All rights reserved.

This journal is a serial publication uniquely identified by an International Standard Serial Number (ISSN) serial number certificate issued by Romanian National Library (Biblioteca Nationala a Romaniei). All the research works are uniquely identified by a CrossRef DOI digital object identifier supplied by indexing and repository platforms. All authors who send their manuscripts to this journal and whose articles are published on this journal retain full copyright of their articles. All the research works published on this journal are meeting the Open Access Publishing requirements and can be freely accessed, shared, modified, distributed and used in educational, commercial and non-commercial purposes under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0).