Abstract

This study investigates the relationship between teachers’ use of artificial intelligence (AI) technologies and their flexible thinking skills within learning processes, addressing a critical gap in the literature where limited research has examined this connection in the context of teacher education. A predictive correlational research design was employed to determine the direction and strength of the relationships between variables and to identify predictors of flexible thinking. The study population consisted of teachers working in public and private institutions across Türkiye, with a convenience sample of 195 teachers included in the final analysis. Data were collected using a Demographic Information Form, the Teacher Perception Scale on the Use of AI in Education, and the Flexible Thinking in Learning Scale. The findings indicated that teachers generally demonstrated moderate to high levels of perception regarding AI use and flexible thinking. Significant differences emerged among teachers who had received AI-related training, as they exhibited higher levels of cognitive flexibility and openness to learning technologies. Regression analyses further revealed that AI use significantly predicted flexible thinking, although the predictive power was modest. This study contributes uniquely to the field by demonstrating a positive association between AI use and flexible thinking in teacher education—a relationship that has been scarcely addressed in prior research. The results underscore the importance of integrating AI-focused training programs into teacher professional development to foster adaptability and innovative pedagogical approaches. Practical recommendations are provided for policymakers, teacher education institutions, and practitioners to strengthen the role of AI in enhancing teachers’ flexible thinking skills.

Keywords

References

• Ajani, O. A., Gamede, B., & Matiyenga, T. C. (2025). Leveraging artificial intelligence to enhance teaching and learning in higher education: Promoting quality education and critical engagement. Journal of Pedagogical Sociology and Psychology, 7(1), 54-69. https://doi.org/10.33902/jpsp.202528400
• Aktas, N., Demirgül, S. A., & Sancar, I. V. (2024). Adaptation of flexible thinking in learning scale to Turkish culture. Journal of Educational Technology & Online Learning, 7(1), 71–83.
• Anthony, B., Kamaludin, A., Romli, A., Raffei, A. F., Phon, D. N., Abdullah, A., & Ming, G. L. (2020). Blended learning adoption and implementation in higher education: A theoretical and systematic review. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 27, 531-578. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-020-09477-z
• Arslan, K. (2020). Artificial intelligence and its applications in education. Journal of Western Anatolia Educational Sciences, 11(1), 71–88. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/baebd/issue/55426/690058
• Barak, M., & Levenberg, A. (2016). A model of flexible thinking in contemporary education. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 22, 74–85.
• Cataudella, S., Mascia, M. L., Agus, M., Ifenthaler, D., Tomczyk, L., & Penna, M. P. (2024). A pilot study on individual and contextual factors influencing teachers’ digitalisation process. Contemporary Educational Technology, 16(4), ep532. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/15189
• Chiu, T. K. F. (2024). What are artificial intelligence literacy and competency? A conceptual study. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 5, 100190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2024.100190
• Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage.
• Çavuş, M. N. (2024). A review on AI-based assessment and evaluation in education. International Journal of English for Specific Purposes, 2(1), 39–54. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/joinesp/issue/82173/1492424
• Deed, C., Blake, D., Henriksen, J., Mooney, A., Prain, V., Tytler, R., Zitzlaff, T., Edwards, M., Emery, S., Muir, T., Swabey, K., Thomas, D., Farrelly, C., Lovejoy, V., Meyers, N., & Fingland, D. (2020). Teacher adaptation to flexible learning environments. Learning Environments Research, 23, 153–165.
• Dweck, C. S. (2006). Mindset: The new psychology of success. Random House.
• Erarslan, A. (2023). Cognitive flexibility and grit during times of crisis for Turkish EFL teachers. Psychology in the Schools, 60(7), 2296–2319.
• Feijóo, C., Fernández, J., Arenal, A., Armuña, C., Ramos, S., Maghiros, I., Vuorikari, R., Cabrera, M., & Punie, Y. (2021). Educational technologies in China – Pre- and post-pandemic lessons. Publications Office of the European Union. https://doi.org/10.2760/604641
• Griethuijsen, R. A. L. F., Eijck, M. W., Haste, H., Brok, P. J., Skinner, N. C., Mansour, N., Savran Gencer, A., & BouJaoude, S. (2014). Global patterns in students’ views of science and interest in science. Research in Science Education, 45(4), 581–603. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-014-9438-6
• Güneyli, A., Burgul, N. S., Dericioğlu, S., Cenkova, N., Becan, S., Şimşek, Ş. E., & Güneralp, H. (2024). Exploring teacher awareness of artificial intelligence in education: A case study from Northern Cyprus. European Journal of Investigation in Health, Psychology and Education, 14(8), 2358–2376. https://doi.org/10.3390/ejihpe14080156
• Hamane, S., & Khalkı, S. (2024). AI in education: Transforming the teaching profession and unlocking future opportunities in Algeria. Journal for Educators, Teachers and Trainers, 15(4), 69–78.
• Holmes, W., Bialik, M., & Fadel, C. (2021). Artificial intelligence in education: Promises and implications for teaching and learning. Center for Curriculum Redesign.
• Işler, B., & Kılıç, M. Y. (2021). The use and development of artificial intelligence in education. Journal of Education and New Methods, 5(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.17932/IAU.EJNM.25480200.2021/ejnm_v5i1001
• Karwowski, M. (2014). Creative mindsets: Measurement, correlates, consequences. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 8(1), 62–70. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0034898
• Kaşkaya, A., & Ateş, Ş. (2025). The effect of artificial intelligence-supported visualization applications on students' writing disposition in the creative writing process. Journal of Pedagogical Research, 9(2), 5-21. https://doi.org/10.33902/JPR.202531916
• Khalili, T., Ketabi, S., Pnevmatikos, D., & Nejadansari Mahabadi, D. (2024). A meta-analysis on the (quasi) experimental studies of critical thinking in second language education in Iran. Language Related Research, 14(6), 245–270.
• Kline, R. B. (2015). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. Guilford Press.
• Köse, B., Radıf, H., Uyar, B., Baysal, İ., & Demirci, N. (2023). The importance of artificial intelligence in education according to teachers’ opinions. Journal of Social, Humanities and Administrative Sciences, 9(71), 4203–4209. https://doi.org/10.29228/JOSHAS.74125
• Li, T. (2020). Use of magic performance as a schema disruption method to facilitate flexible thinking. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 38, 100735.
• Luckin, R. (2018). Machine learning and human intelligence: The future of education for the 21st century. UCL Institute of Education Press.
• Lübke, L., Pinquart, M., & Schwinger, M. (2021). The role of flexibility in the realization of inclusive education. Sustainability, 13(8), 4452.
• Martin, M. M., & Rubin, R. B. (1995). A new measure of cognitive flexibility. Psychological Reports, 76(2), 623–626. https://doi.org/10.2466/pr0.1995.76.2.623
• McCowan, T. (2023). The climate crisis as a driver for pedagogical renewal. Teaching in Higher Education, 28(5), 933–952.
• McCrae, R. R., & Sutin, A. R. (2009). Openness to experience. In M. R. Leary & R. H. Hoyle (Eds.), Handbook of individual differences in social behavior (pp. 257–273). Guilford Press.
• Meylani, R. (2024). Artificial intelligence in the education of teachers: A qualitative synthesis of the cutting-edge research literature. Journal of Computer and Education Research, 12(24), 600–637. https://doi.org/10.18009/jcer.1477709
• Mnguni, L. (2023). A critical reflection on the affordances of web 3.0 and artificial intelligence in life sciences education. Journal of Pedagogical Sociology and Psychology, 5(2), 1-9. https://doi.org/10.33902/jpsp.202322298
• Ng, D. T. K., Chan, E. K. C., & Lo, C. K. (2025). Opportunities, challenges and school strategies for integrating generative AI in education. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 8, 100373. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2025.100373
• Nguyen, M. N., Thomas, S., Gattiker, A. E., Kashyap, S., & Varshney, K. R. (2018). SimplerVoice: A key message & visual description generator system for illiteracy (arXiv.1811.01299). arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1811.01299
• OECD. (2019). Going digital: Shaping policies. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264312012-en
• Özen, F., & Üçüncü, A. S. (2022). The effect of teachers' cognitive flexibility on attitudes towards compulsory distance education during the COVID-19 pandemic. International Journal of Psychology and Educational Studies, 9(2), 492–508.
• Özer, S., Sancar Yazıcı, A., Akgül, S., & Yıldırım, A. (2023). Teachers’ views on the use of artificial intelligence in schools. National Journal of Education, 3(10), 1776–1794. https://uleder.com/index.php/uleder/article/view/360
• Öztemel, E. (2020). Artificial intelligence and the future of humanity. In M. Şeker, Y. Bulduklu, C. Korkut, & M. Doğrul (Eds.), Information technologies and communication: Individual and societal security (pp. 95–112). TUBA. https://doi.org/10.53478/TUBA.2020.002
• Pepin, B., Gueudet, G., & Trouche, L. (2017). Refining teacher design capacity: Mathematics teachers’ interactions with digital curriculum resources. ZDM, 49, 799–812.
• Perera, M., & Aboal, D. (2019). The impact of a mathematics computer‑assisted learning platform on students' mathematics test scores. United Nations University – Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology.
• Pham, S. T. H. (2025). Empirical investigation of the experience of educators and politicians with the emergence of artificial intelligence in education. Technology in Society, 83, 102965. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2025.102965
• Pratiwi, H., Riwanda, A., Hasruddin, H., Sujarwo, S., & Syamsudin, A. (2025). Transforming learning or creating dependency? Teachers’ perspectives and barriers to AI integration in education. Journal of Pedagogical Research, 9(2), 127-142. https://doi.org/10.33902/JPR.202531677
• Ravi, P., Broski, A., Stump, G., Abelson, H., Klopfer, E., & Breazeal, C. (2023). Understanding teacher perspectives and experiences after deployment of AI literacy curriculum in middle-school classrooms (arXiv:2312.04839). arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2312.04839
• Regona, M., Yigitcanlar, T., Xia, B., & Li, R. Y. M. (2022). Opportunities and adoption challenges of AI in the construction industry: A PRISMA review. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, 8(1), 45. https://doi.org/10.3390/joitmc8010045
• Russell, S. J., & Norvig, P. (2021). Artificial intelligence: A modern approach. Pearson.
• Salvucci, S., Walter, E., Conley, V., Fink, S., & Saba, M. (1997). Measurement error studies at the National Center for Education Statistics. National Center for Education Statistics.
• Sarıtiken, H. (2024). Teachers’ perspectives on artificial intelligence applications in Turkish language teaching. Journal of Pedagogical Sociology and Psychology, 6(3), 233-247. https://doi.org/10.33902/jpsp.202433205
• Scott, G., Leritz, L. E., & Mumford, M. D. (2004). The effectiveness of creativity training: A quantitative review. Creativity Research Journal, 16(4), 361–388. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400410409534549
• Sperling, K. (2024). In search of artificial intelligence (AI) literacy in teacher professional knowledge: A scoping review. Teaching and Teacher Education, 139, 104519. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2023.104519
• Spiro, R. J., & Jehng, J. C. (1990). Cognitive flexibility and hypertext: Theory and technology for the nonlinear and multidimensional traversal of complex subject matter. In D. Nix & R. Spiro (Eds.), Cognition, education, and multimedia (pp. 163–205). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
• Swiecki, Z., Khosravi, H., Chen, G., Martinez-Maldonado, R., Lodge, J. M., Milligan, S., & Gašević, D. (2022). Assessment in the age of artificial intelligence. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 3, 100075. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2022.100075
• U.S. Department of Education. (2023). Artificial intelligence and future of teaching and learning: Insights and recommendations. Office of Educational Technology. https://tech.ed.gov
• UNESCO. (2022). Recommendation on the ethics of artificial intelligence. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000381137
• UNESCO. (2023). Global education monitoring report 2023: Technology in education – A tool on whose terms? https://doi.org/10.54676/UZQV8501
• Üzüm, B., Elçiçek, M., & Pesen, A. (2024). Development of teachers’ perception scale regarding artificial intelligence use in education: Validity and reliability study. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 41(5), 2776–2787. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2024.2385518
• Yalçın, A. (2024). Artificial intelligence applications developed by public institutions for society in Turkey. Istanbul Aydın University Journal of Social Sciences, 16(2), 185–215. https://doi.org/10.17932/IAU.IAUSBD.2021.021/iausbd_v16i2002
• Zawacki-Richter, O., Marín, V. I., Bond, M., & Gouverneur, F. (2019). Systematic review on artificial intelligence applications in higher education. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 16(1), 39. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-019-0171-0
• Zhao, Y. (2010). Preparing globally competent teachers: A new imperative for teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 61(5), 422–431. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487110375802
• Zhou, X., Van Brummelen, J., & Lin, P. (2020). Designing AI learning experiences for K-12 (arXiv.2009.10228). arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2009.10228

License

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.