Beyond Acceptance: Exploring the Complexities of ChatGPT Integration in Vietnamese Language Education
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.60087/ijls.v3.n1.001Keywords:
ChatGPT, Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), Vietnamese EFL Teachers, Perceptions and Experiences, Language EducationAbstract
This qualitative study explores Vietnamese EFL teachers’ perspectives on using ChatGPT in language education, employing the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) as a theoretical framework. Through ten semi-structured interviews with Vietnamese teachers, the study explores the interplay between perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and teachers’ attitudes towards ChatGPT. The findings reveal a nuanced picture of initial hesitation and evolving perceptions, highlighting both the potential benefits and challenges of integrating AI into teaching practices. While teachers recognized ChatGPT’s potential for time-saving, idea generation, and language support, they also expressed concerns about accuracy, ethical implications, and the need to balance AI’s capabilities with human guidance and critical thinking. The study underscores the importance of contextual factors, cultural sensitivity, and ongoing dialogue in navigating the complexities of AI adoption in education. The insights generated from this research contribute to a deeper understanding of the factors influencing technology acceptance among educators and offer valuable implications for the development of effective strategies for AI integration in language classrooms and beyond.
Downloads
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Tuyet-Nhung Thi Nguyen, Ngoc-Tai Huynh (Author)

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Copyright: © The Author(s), 2024. Published by IJLS. This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.