A Unified Model for Innovation and Technology in Education: A Framework for Teachers’ Adoption of AI Tools in Teaching
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.46328/ijemst.5683Keywords:
Artificial Intelligence in education, Technology adoption, Teacher intention, Structural equation modeling, Educational technology integrationAbstract
In today’s technologically advanced classrooms, artificial intelligence (AI) offers promises of enhanced teaching and personalized learning. Yet integrating AI tools into teaching hinges on teachers’ willingness and ability to adopt these innovations. This study develops and validates the Unified Theory of Innovation and Technology in Education (UNITED) model an integrated framework grounded in the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) and related theories to explain secondary school teachers’ behavioral intent and actual use of AI tools. A descriptive-causal design with structural equation modeling (SEM) was employed, involving 428 secondary teachers in Northern Mindanao, Philippines. Results confirmed an excellent-fitting model explaining teachers’ AI adoption. Perceived usefulness of AI and social influence emerged as significant positive predictors of teachers’ intention to adopt AI tools, while perceived ease of use showed no direct effect on intention. Facilitating conditions (infrastructure and support) proved critical for translating intention into actual AI use in the classroom. The final UNITED model unifies multiple technology acceptance constructs, offering both theoretical and practical insights. We recommend targeted professional development to boost teachers’ AI competencies and improved institutional support to foster effective AI integration in education.
References
Abdalla, R. A. M. (2024). Examining awareness, social influence, and perceived enjoyment in the TAM framework as determinants of ChatGPT. Personalization as a moderator. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, 10(3), 100327. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joitmc.2024.100327
Abdullah, P., & Fraidan, A. (2024). Anticipatory Thinking and AI-Driven Assessments : A Balanced Approach to AI Integration in Education Aligned with Saudi Vision 2030. African Journal of Biomedical Research, 27(3), 619–628.
Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T
Akinnuwesi, B. A., Uzoka, F.-M. E., Fashoto, S. G., Mbunge, E., Odumabo, A., Amusa, O. O., Okpeku, M., & Owolabi, O. (2022). A modified UTAUT model for the acceptance and use of digital technology for tackling COVID-19. Sustainable Operations and Computers, 3, 118–135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.susoc.2021.12.001
Alenezi, W. (2024). Potentiality and Apprehensions of Artificial Intelligence in Education: Perspectives of Education Staff. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology, 12(4), 942–956. https://doi.org/10.46328/ijemst.4177
Alissa, R. A. S., & Hamadneh, M. A. (2023). The Level of Science and Mathematics Teachers’ Employment of Artificial Intelligence Applications in the Educational Process. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology, 11(6), 1597–1608. https://doi.org/10.46328/ijemst.3806
Banerjee, P. (2024). Transforming the world of education through ai-enabled learning – a new normal. The Business and Management Review, 15(2), 5–6.
Chao, C.-M. (2019). Factors Determining the Behavioral Intention to Use Mobile Learning: An Application and Extension of the UTAUT Model. Frontiers in Psychology, 10(JULY), 446627. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01652
Chiu, T. K. F., Meng, H., Chai, C.-S., King, I., Wong, S., & Yam, Y. (2022). Creation and Evaluation of a Pretertiary Artificial Intelligence (AI) Curriculum. IEEE Transactions on Education, 65(1), 30–39. https://doi.org/10.1109/TE.2021.3085878
Chounta, I. A., Bardone, E., Raudsep, A., & Pedaste, M. (2022). Exploring Teachers’ Perceptions of Artificial Intelligence as a Tool to Support their Practice in Estonian K-12 Education. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 32(3), 725–755. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-021-00243-5
Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008
Eden, C. A., Chisom, O. N., & Adeniyi, I. S. (2024). Integrating AI in education: Opportunities, challenges, and ethical considerations. Magna Scientia Advanced Research and Reviews, 10(2), 006–013. https://doi.org/10.30574/msarr.2024.10.2.0039
Feng, J., Yu, B., Tan, W. H., Dai, Z., & Li, Z. (2025). Key factors influencing educational technology adoption in higher education: A systematic review. PLOS Digital Health, 4(4), e0000764. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pdig.0000764
Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, Attitude, Intention, and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research. Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378101800104
Greener, S. (2022). Digging for acceptance theory. Interactive Learning Environments, 30(4), 587–588. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2022.2062170
Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., Black, W. C., & Anderson, R. E. (2019). Multivariate Data Analysis (Eighth). Cengage (pp. 147–153). www.cengage.com/highered
Hazzan-Bishara, A., Kol, O., & Levy, S. (2025). The factors affecting teachers’ adoption of AI technologies: A unified model of external and internal determinants. Education and Information Technologies, 30(11), 15043–15069. https://doi.org/10.1007/S10639-025-13393-Z/TABLES/4
Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2015). A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43(1), 115–135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8
Hooper, D., Coughlan, J., & Mullen, M. R. (2018). Structural equation modelling: Guidelines for determining model fit. Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods, 6(1), 53–60.
Kelly, S., Kaye, S.-A., & Oviedo-Trespalacios, O. (2023). What factors contribute to the acceptance of artificial intelligence? A systematic review. Telematics and Informatics, 77, 101925. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2022.101925
Khan, T., Nag, A. K., Joshi, B., Acharya, R., & Thomas, S. (2021). Influencing Factors of Behavior Intention and Actual Use of Technology: An Application of UTAUT Model on Science Undergraduates. Journal of Higher Education Theory and Practice, 21(13), 89–103. https://doi.org/10.33423/jhetp.v21i13.4792
Kline, R. B. (2016). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (4th ed.). The Guilford Press. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2015-56948-000
Lee, A. T., Ramasamy, R. K., & Subbarao, A. (2025). Understanding Psychosocial Barriers to Healthcare Technology Adoption: A Review of TAM Technology Acceptance Model and Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology and UTAUT Frameworks. Healthcare, 13(3), 250. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare13030250
Luo, J., Ahmad, S. F., Alyaemeni, A., Ou, Y., Irshad, M., Alyafi-Alzahri, R., Alsanie, G., & Unnisa, S. T. (2024). Role of perceived ease of use, usefulness, and financial strength on the adoption of health information systems: the moderating role of hospital size. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 11(1), 516. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-02976-9
Magat, R. J. B., & Sangalang, E. M. (2024). Teachers’ Familiarity, Perceptions, and Training Needs on the Use of ChatGPT in Mathematics Instruction. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology, 12(6), 1471–1487. https://doi.org/10.46328/ijemst.4332
Mailizar, M., Almanthari, A., & Maulina, S. (2021). Examining Teachers’ Behavioral Intention to Use E-learning in Teaching of Mathematics: An Extended TAM Model. Contemporary Educational Technology, 13(2), ep298. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/9709
Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge: A Framework for Teacher Knowledge. Teachers College Record: The Voice of Scholarship in Education, 108(6), 1017–1054. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9620.2006.00684.x
Møgelvang, A., Bjelland, C., Grassini, S., & Ludvigsen, K. (2024). Gender Differences in the Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence Chatbots in Higher Education: Characteristics and Consequences. Education Sciences, 14(12), 1363. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14121363
Ofosu-Ampong, K. (2023). Gender Differences in Perception of Artificial Intelligence-Based Tools. Journal of Digital Art & Humanities, 4(2), 52–56. https://doi.org/10.33847/2712-8149.4.2_6
Otis, N. G., Delecourt, S., Cranney, K., & Koning, R. (2025). Global Evidence on Gender Gaps and Generative AI - Working Paper. Faculty & Research - Harvard Business School. https://www.hbs.edu/faculty/Pages/item.aspx?num=66548
Policar, G. (2025). 84% of U.S. Educators Actively Use AI In The Classroom. Study.Com. https://teachinglicense.study.com/featured-insights/teachers-change-minds-about-AI.html
Roemer, E., Schuberth, F., & Henseler, J. (2021). HTMT2–an improved criterion for assessing discriminant validity in structural equation modeling. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 121(12), 2637–2650. https://doi.org/10.1108/IMDS-02-2021-0082
Solak, E. (2024). Exploring the Efficiency of ChatGPT and Artificial Intelligence in Advancing Academic Writing Pedagogy. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology, 1525–1537. https://doi.org/10.46328/ijemst.4373
Stone, B. M. (2021). The Ethical Use of Fit Indices in Structural Equation Modeling: Recommendations for Psychologists. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 783226. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.783226
Šumak, B., Heričko, M., & Pušnik, M. (2011). A meta-analysis of e-learning technology acceptance: The role of user types and e-learning technology types. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(6), 2067–2077. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2011.08.005
UCLA. (2021). Mplus Class Notes: Confirmatory Factor Analysis. Advanced Research Computing. https://stats.oarc.ucla.edu/mplus/seminars/mplus-class-notes/cfa/
Vardar, N., Gümüş, Ç., & Akif Gündüz, M. (2024). Perceived Usefulness, Ease of Use, and Usage of Distance Education Systems: Evidence from Turkey. TOJET: The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 23(2), 93–99.
Venkatesh, Morris, Davis, & Davis. (2003). User Acceptance of Information Technology: Toward a Unified View. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425. https://doi.org/10.2307/30036540
Venkatesh, V. (2022). Adoption and use of AI tools: a research agenda grounded in UTAUT. Annals of Operations Research, 308(1–2), 641–652. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-020-03918-9
Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (2000). A Theoretical Extension of the Technology Acceptance Model: Four Longitudinal Field Studies. Management Science, 46(2), 186–204. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.46.2.186.11926
Wibowo, N. A. P., & Sobari, N. (2023). The influence of behavioral intention, facilitating condition, and habit on use behavioral of QRIS: a study on mobile banking services. Gema Wiralodra, 14(3), 1243–1258. https://doi.org/10.31943/gw.v14i3.482
Xue, L., Rashid, A. M., & Ouyang, S. (2024). The Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) in Higher Education: A Systematic Review. Sage Open, 14(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440241229570
Yao, N., & Wang, Q. (2024). Factors influencing pre-service special education teachers’ intention toward AI in education: Digital literacy, teacher self-efficacy, perceived ease of use, and perceived usefulness. Heliyon, 10(14), e34894. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e34894
Yessenova, K., Baltabayeva, Z., Amirbekova, A., Koblanova, A., Sametova, Z., & Ismailova, F. (2023). Investigating Competencies and Attitudes towards Online Education in Language Learning/Teaching after COVID-19. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology, 11(4), 862–880. https://doi.org/10.46328/ijemst.3348
Yuan, Z., Liu, J., Deng, X., Ding, T., & Wijaya, T. T. (2023). Facilitating Conditions as the Biggest Factor Influencing Elementary School Teachers’ Usage Behavior of Dynamic Mathematics Software in China. Mathematics, 11(6), 1536. https://doi.org/10.3390/math11061536
Zhang, X., & Wareewanich, T. (2024). A Study of the Factors Influencing Teachers’ Willingness to Use Generative Artificial Intelligence Based on the UTAUT Model. International Journal of Interactive Mobile Technologies (IJIM), 18(06), 126–142. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijim.v18i06.47991
Zulkarnain, N. S., & Yunus, M. M. (2023). Teachers’ Perceptions and Continuance Usage Intention of Artificial Intelligence Technology in Tesl. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research and Analysis, 06(05). https://doi.org/10.47191/ijmra/v6-i5-34
Zuo, Z., Luo, Y., Yan, S., & Jiang, L. (2025). From Perception to Practice: Artificial Intelligence as a Pathway to Enhancing Digital Literacy in Higher Education Teaching. Systems, 13(8), 664. https://doi.org/10.3390/systems13080664
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Articles may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Authors alone are responsible for the contents of their articles. The journal owns the copyright of the articles. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand, or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of the research material.
The author(s) of a manuscript agree that if the manuscript is accepted for publication in the journal, the published article will be copyrighted using a Creative Commons “Attribution 4.0 International” license. This license allows others to freely copy, distribute, and display the copyrighted work, and derivative works based upon it, under certain specified conditions.
Authors are responsible for obtaining written permission to include any images or artwork for which they do not hold copyright in their articles, or to adapt any such images or artwork for inclusion in their articles. The copyright holder must be made explicitly aware that the image(s) or artwork will be made freely available online as part of the article under a Creative Commons “Attribution 4.0 International” license.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
