Research Article

Factor structure of artificial intelligence use in university teaching pedagogy

Emilio Flores-Mamani 1 * , Arcelia-Olga Rojas-Salazar 2 , Pedro-Basilio Tapia-Espinoza 1 , Constantino-Miguel Nieves-Barreto 2 , Juan Inquilla-Mamani 1 , Ányela-Yésica Flores-Yapuchura 2 , Gilberto Vilca-Cutipa 1
More Detail
1 Universidad Nacional del Altiplano, Puno, PERU2 Universidad Nacional del Callao, Callao, PERU* Corresponding Author
Contemporary Educational Technology, 18(4), October 2026, ep682, https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/19132
Published: 12 August 2026
OPEN ACCESS   112 Views   51 Downloads
Download Full Text (PDF)

ABSTRACT

The use of artificial intelligence (AI) in higher education pedagogy has gained increasing relevance; however, there remains a shortage of psychometrically validated instruments capable of assessing, in a multidimensional and context-specific manner, faculty adoption of these technologies. The aim of this study was to identify the factorial structure and evaluate the psychometric properties of an instrument designed to measure AI use among university faculty. The instrument was developed based on the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology and was administered to a convenience sample of 330 university instructors. Exploratory factor analysis revealed a robust seven-factor structure explaining 66.90% of the total variance, allowing the refinement and optimization of the instrument from 50 to 30 items. The final scale demonstrated excellent overall internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.913). It is concluded that the developed instrument is a valid and reliable tool for higher education institutions to assess and diagnose faculty levels of AI adoption, thereby facilitating the design of context-specific institutional policies and effective professional development programs in AI-enhanced pedagogy.
Keywords: artificial intelligence, university pedagogy, exploratory factor analysis, reliability

CITATION (APA)

Flores-Mamani, E., Rojas-Salazar, A.-O., Tapia-Espinoza, P.-B., Nieves-Barreto, C.-M., Inquilla-Mamani, J., Flores-Yapuchura, Á.-Y., & Vilca-Cutipa, G. (2026). Factor structure of artificial intelligence use in university teaching pedagogy. Contemporary Educational Technology, 18(4), ep682. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/19132

REFERENCES

  1. Akgun, S., & Greenhow, C. (2022). Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings. AI Ethics, 2, 431-440. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43681-021-00096-7
  2. American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education. (2014). The standards for educational and psychological testing. American Educational Research Association. https://www.apa.org/science/programs/testing/standards
  3. Bartlett, M. S. (1954). A note on the multiplying factors for various χ2 approximations. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B, 16(2), 296-298. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2517-6161.1954.tb00174.x
  4. Blesa Pérez, A., Ripollés, M., & Boughattas, Y. (2024). Editorial del monográfico “inteligencia artificial en educación superior” [Editorial of the monograph “artificial intelligence in higher education”]. Revista de Docencia Universitaria, 22(2), 9-14. https://doi.org/10.4995/redu.2024.23133
  5. Chen, L., Chen, P., & Lin, Z. (2020). Artificial intelligence in education: A review. IEEE Access, 8, 75264-75278. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2020.2988510
  6. Crompton, H., & Burke, D. (2023). Artificial intelligence in higher education: The state of the field. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 20, Article 22. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-023-00392-8
  7. Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika, 16(3), 297-334. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02310555
  8. DeVellis, R. F., & Thorpe, C. T. (2022). Scale development: Theory and applications (5th ed.). SAGE.
  9. Freire, P. (2020). Pedagogía de la autonomía: Saberes necesarios para la práctica educativa [Pedagogy of autonomy: Knowledge necessary for educational practice] (3rd ed.). Paz e Terra.
  10. Fuentes Pizarro, C. D. P. (2022). Metodología de enseñanza para desarrollar las competencias digitales en los docentes universitarios de la facultad de ciencias sociales de una universidad nacional de Lima [Teaching methodology to develop digital skills in university teachers of the faculty of social sciences of a national university in Lima] [Master’s thesis, Universidad San Ignacio de Loyola].
  11. González, N. A., Sosa, A. J., & Martín, H. M. (2024). La necesidad de desacelerar laeducación superior: Más allá de una universidad centrifugada y del entretenimiento [The need to slow down higher education: Beyond a spin-on university and entertainment]. En-Claves del Pensamiento, 36. https://doi.org/10.46530/ecdp.v0i36.691
  12. Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2019). Multivariate data analysis (8th ed.). Cengage.
  13. Hernández-Sampieri, R., & Mendoza, C. P. (2022). Metodología de la investigación: Las rutas cuantitativa, cualitativa y mixta [Research methodology: The quantitative, qualitative, and mixed approaches] (7th ed.). McGraw-Hill.
  14. Holmes, W., Bialik, M., & Fadel, C. (2019). Artificial intelligence in education: Promises and implications for teaching and learning. Center for Curriculum Redesign.
  15. Jeet, G., & Pant, S. (2023). Creating joyful experiences for enhancing meaningful learning and integrating 21st century skills. International Journal of Current Science Research and Review, 6(2). https://doi.org/10.47191/ijcsrr/V6-i2-05
  16. Kaiser, H. F. (1974). An index of factorial simplicity. Psychometrika, 39(1), 31-36. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02291575
  17. Kaşarcı, İ., Akın Demircan, Z., Çeliker Ercan, G., & İnci, T. (2025). Managing artificial intelligence ethics in higher education: A systematic framework for issues and policy. International Journal of Current Educational Studies, 4(2), 112-137. https://doi.org/10.46328/ijces.223
  18. Kasneci, E., Sessler, K., Küchemann, S., Bannert, M., Dementieva, D., Fischer, F., Gasser, U., Groh, G., Günnemann, S., Hüllermeier, E., Krusche, S., Kutyniok, G., Michaeli, T., Nerdel, C., Pfeffer, J., Poquet, O., Sailer, M., Schmidt, A., Seidel, T., … Kuhn, J. (2023). ChatGPT for good? On opportunities and challenges of large language models for education. Learning and Individual Differences, 103, Article 102274. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2023.102274
  19. Kohnke, L., & Ulla, M. B. (2024). Embracing generative artificial intelligence: The perspectives of English instructors in Thai higher education institutions. Knowledge Management & E-Learning, 16(4).
  20. Likert, R. (1932). A technique for the measurement of attitudes. Archives of Psychology, 22(140), 1-55.
  21. Luckin, R., Holmes, W., Griffiths, M., & Forcier, L. B. (2016). Intelligence unleashed: An argument for AI in education. Center for Curriculum Redesign.
  22. Mah, D. K., & Groß, M. (2024). Artificial intelligence in higher education: Exploring faculty use, self-efficacy, distinct profiles, and professional development needs. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 21, Article 58. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-024-00490-1
  23. Miguez, M. A. (2025). La inteligencia artificial como recurso didáctico en el proceso de enseñanza y aprendizaje [Artificial intelligence as a teaching resource in the teaching and learning process]. Revista Multidisciplinar Epistemología de las Ciencias, 2(2). https://doi.org/10.71112/vqb1zx28
  24. Mokoena, O. P., & Seeletse, S. M. (2025). AI in rural classrooms: Challenges and perspectives from South African educators. International Journal of Current Educational Studies, 4(2), 30-52. https://doi.org/10.46328/ijces.199
  25. Ng, D. T. K., Wu, W., Leung, J. K. L., Chiu, T. K. F., & Chu, S. K. W. (2024). Design and validation of the AI literacy questionnaire: The affective, behavioural, cognitive and ethical approach. British Journal of Educational Technology, 55(3), 1082-1104. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13411
  26. Ortiz Garcia, L. K. (2025). La inteligencia artificial generativa para mejorar la competencia digital en docentes universitarios [Generative artificial intelligence to improve digital competence in university teachers] [PhD thesis, Universidad César Vallejo].
  27. Ouyang, F., & Jiao, P. (2021). Artificial intelligence in education: The three paradigms. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 2, Article 100020. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2021.100020
  28. Pedro, F., Subosa, M., & Rivas, A. (2022). Brecha digital y educación en contextos vulnerables [Digital divide and education in vulnerable contexts]. Revista de la UNESCO sobre Educación en América Latina, 10(1), 25-40.
  29. Perez, R. C. L. (2025). AI in higher education: Faculty perspective towards artificial intelligence through UTAUT approach. Ho Chi Minh City Open University Journal of Science: Social Sciences, 14(4). https://doi.org/10.46223/HCMCOUJS.soci.en.14.4.2851.2024
  30. Sánchez, Z. B., & Jiménez, H. J. (2025). La pluma digital frente al desafío editorial [The digital pen facing the publishing challenge]. Anales de la Facultad de Ciencias Médicas, 58(2). https://doi.org/10.18004/anales/2025.058.02.101
  31. Scherer, R., Siddiq, F., & Tondeur, J. (2019). The technology acceptance model (TAM). Computers & Education, 128, 13-35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.09.009
  32. Selwyn, N. (2019). Should robots replace teachers? AI and the future of education. Polity Press.
  33. Selwyn, N. (2024). On the limits of artificial intelligence in education. Nordisk Tidsskrift for Pedagogikk og Kritikk, 10(1), 3-14. https://doi.org/10.23865/ntpk.v10.6062
  34. Silgado-Tuñón, D. A., & López-Flores, J. I. (2025). Inteligencia artificial generativa en la educación superior [Generative artificial intelligence in higher education]. UNIÓN – Revista Iberoamericana de Educación Matemática, 21(73).
  35. Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2019). Using multivariate statistics (7th ed.). Pearson.
  36. UNESCO. (2023). Guidance on generative AI in education and research. UNESCO. https://www.unesco.org/en/articles/guidance-generative-ai-education-and-research
  37. Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425-478. https://doi.org/10.2307/30036540
  38. Xia, Q., Weng, X., Ouyang, F., Lin, T. J., & Chiu, T. K. F. (2024). A scoping review on how generative artificial intelligence transforms assessment in higher education. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 21, Article 40. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-024-00468-z
  39. Xianjia, W., & Mohamad Nasri, N. (2025). University faculty perceptions of artificial intelligence usage. International Journal of Academic Research in Progressive Education and Development, 14(3), 937-947. https://doi.org/10.6007/IJARPED/v14-i3/26098
  40. Yurt, E., & Kaşarcı, İ. (2025). Exploring prospective teachers’ intentions for artificial intelligence integration in education: The role of motivation. AERA Open, 11. https://doi.org/10.1177/23328584251403990
  41. 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, Article 39. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-019-0171-0
  42. Zhai, X., Chu, X., Chai, C. S., Jong, M. S. Y., Istenič, A., Spector, J. M., Liu, J.-B., Yuan, J., & Li, Y. (2021). A review of artificial intelligence (AI) in education from 2010 to 2020. Complexity, 2021, Article 8812542. https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/8812542