INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CHANGES IN EDUCATION
Research Article
Aug 15, 2026 144 57

Teachers’ Negotiations of Trust When Integrating Generative AI into a Teaching Practice

Sara Ekström 1 * ,
Anna Roumbanis Viberg 1
1 Department of Social and Behavioural Studies, University West, Sweden* Corresponding Author
International Journal of Changes in Education, 3(4), 2026, 525-536, https://doi.org/10.47852/bonviewIJCE52027222
Online publication date: Dec 17, 2025
Publication date: Aug 15, 2026
Full Text (PDF)

ABSTRACT

This study investigates teachers’ reasoning around implementing generative AI (GenAI) in education. It aims to increase understanding of the importance of collective negotiation of trust that arises when teachers collectively explore generative AI as a pedagogical tool for teaching and learning. Data collected through a longitudinal focus group study comprising four workshops and two SWOT analyses conducted over nine months were analyzed using inductive thematic analysis. Trust was used as a theoretical lens to interpret the results. The results indicate that teachers negotiate trust in generative AI at three levels. At the instrumental level, negotiations concern the usability of the tool in terms of quality and efficiency, the reliability of different tools, and regulatory limitations on their use. At the pedagogical level, negotiations emerge overtrust in human–AI communication and interaction, focusing on linguistic precision and the importance of human presence in learning, alongside discussions about future teacher proficiency. At the systemic level, negotiations about trust occur in relation to beliefs about a future educational context and the teacher’s role within it, where reasoning about the socializing function of education becomes evident. The study emphasizes the importance of continuous professional dialogue and critical reflection to build collective trust in generative AI as an educational tool and ensure a responsible integration into the teaching practice. The research highlights the need for balanced, well-founded approaches to this integration, involving negotiations of trust across multiple levels and perspectives.

KEYWORDS

generative AI (GenAI) trust collective negotiations teaching practice K-12 education

CITATION (APA)

Ekström, S., & Viberg, A. R. (2026). Teachers’ Negotiations of Trust When Integrating Generative AI into a Teaching Practice. International Journal of Changes in Education, 3(4), 525-536. https://doi.org/10.47852/bonviewIJCE52027222
Harvard
Ekström, S., and Viberg, A. R. (2026). Teachers’ Negotiations of Trust When Integrating Generative AI into a Teaching Practice. International Journal of Changes in Education, 3(4), pp. 525-536. https://doi.org/10.47852/bonviewIJCE52027222
Vancouver
Ekström S, Viberg AR. Teachers’ Negotiations of Trust When Integrating Generative AI into a Teaching Practice. International Journal of Changes in Education. 2026;3(4):525-36. https://doi.org/10.47852/bonviewIJCE52027222
AMA
Ekström S, Viberg AR. Teachers’ Negotiations of Trust When Integrating Generative AI into a Teaching Practice. International Journal of Changes in Education. 2026;3(4), 525-536. https://doi.org/10.47852/bonviewIJCE52027222
Chicago
Ekström, Sara, and Anna Roumbanis Viberg. "Teachers’ Negotiations of Trust When Integrating Generative AI into a Teaching Practice". International Journal of Changes in Education 2026 3 no. 4 (2026): 525-536. https://doi.org/10.47852/bonviewIJCE52027222
MLA
Ekström, Sara et al. "Teachers’ Negotiations of Trust When Integrating Generative AI into a Teaching Practice". International Journal of Changes in Education, vol. 3, no. 4, 2026, pp. 525-536. https://doi.org/10.47852/bonviewIJCE52027222

REFERENCES

  1. Montenegro-Rueda, M., Fernández-Cerero, J., Fernández-Batanero, J. M., & López-Meneses, E. (2023). Impact of the implementation of ChatGPT in education: A systematic review. Computers, 12(8), 153. https://doi.org/10.3390/computers12080153
  2. Deng, R., Jiang, M., Yu, X., Lu, Y., & Liu, S. (2025). Does ChatGPT enhance student learning? A systematic review and meta-analysis of experimental studies. Computers & Education, 227, 105224. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2024.105224
  3. Yim, I. H. Y., & Su, J. (2025). Artificial intelligence (AI) learning tools in K-12 education: A scoping review. Journal of Computers in Education, 12(1), 93–131. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40692-023-00304-9
  4. Swedish National Agency for Education [Skolverket]. (2024). Artificiell intelligens i undervisningen – en lägesbild över lärares användning och hantering av AI i grundskolan. förskoleklass och fritidshem under 2024 (Artificial Intelligence in Education – A Status Report on Teachers’ Use and Management of AI in Primary School, Preschool Class, and After-School Care in 2024), Retrieved from: https://www.skolverket.se/sok-publikationer/publikationsserier/ovrigt-material/2024/artificiell-intelligens-i-undervisningen—grundskolan-forskoleklass-och-fritidshem
  5. Mai, D. T. T., Da, C. V., & Hanh, N. V. (2024). The use of ChatGPT in teaching and learning: A systematic review through SWOT analysis approach. In Frontiers in Education, 9, 1328769. Frontiers Media SA. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2024.1328769
  6. Swedish Teachers [Sveriges Lärare]. (2024). Lärarledd digitalisering - möjligheter och förbehåll på tröskeln till ett nytt AI-landskap (Teacher-led digitalisation: Opportunities and caveats on the threshold of a new AI landscape). Retrieved from: Retrieved from: https://lararpdf.tmkontor.se/sv/sveriges-larares-pdf-katalog/trycksaker/sveriges-larare/undersokningar/teacher-led-digitalisation-pdf.html
  7. UNESCO. (2024). AI competency framework for teachers. https://doi.org/10.54675/ZJTE2084
  8. Government Offices of Sweden [Regeringskansliet]. (2018). Nationell inriktning för artificiell intelligens (National appr oach to artificial intelligence). Retrieved from: https://www.regeringen.se/contentassets/nationell_inriktning_for_artificiell_intelligens
  9. OECD. (2025). Empowering learners for the age of AI: An AI literacy framework for primary and secondary education (Review draft). OECD, Paris. https://ailiteracyframework.org
  10. Luckin, R., & Holmes, W. (2016). Intelligence unleashed: An argument for AI in education. UK: Pearson.
  11. Hrastinski, S., Olofsson, A. D., Arkenback, C., Ekström, S., Ericsson, E., Fransson, G., . . . , & Utterberg, M. (2019). Critical imaginaries and reflections on artificial intelligence and robots in postdigital K-12 education. Postdigital Science and Education, 1(2), 427–445. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42438-019-00046-x
  12. 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 educa tors? International Journal of Educational Technology in High er Education, 16(1), 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-019-0171-0
  13. Popenici, S. A. D., & Kerr, S. (2017). Exploring the impact of artificial intelligence on teaching and learning in higher education. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 12(1), 22. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41039-017-0062-8
  14. European Commission: Directorate-General for Education, Youth, Sport and Culture. (2022). Ethical guidelines on the use of artificial intelligence (AI) and data in teaching and learning for educators, Publications Office of the European Union, https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2766/153756
  15. Luckin, R., Cukurova, M., Kent, C., & Du Boulay, B. (2022). Empowering educators to be AI-ready. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 3, 100076. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2022.100076
  16. Velander, J., Taiye, M. A., Otero, N., & Milrad, M. (2024). Artificial Intelligence in K-12 Education: Eliciting and reflecting on Swedish teachers’ understanding of AI and its implications for teaching & learning. Education and Information Technologies, 29(4), 4085–4105. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-11990-4
  17. Roumbanis Viberg, A.R., & Ekström, S. (2024). Prepare Teac hing with Generative Artificial Intelligence-what teachers at the upper secondary level do and need to know [Abstract for conference] Udforsk 2024, Kristiansand, Norway, Retrieved from: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Sara-Ekstroem2/publication/386585098_Teaching_with_Generative_Artificial_Intelligence/links/6757f25a2c5fa80df7b5e287/Teaching-with-Generative-Artificial-Intelligence.pdf
  18. Jayawardena, C. K., Gunathilake, Y., & Ihalagedara, D. (2025). Dental Students’ learning experience: Artificial intelligence vs human feedback on assignments. International Dental Journal, 75(1), 100–108. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.identj.2024.12.022
  19. Nygren, T., Samuelsson, M., Hansson, P. O., Efimova, E., & Bachelder, S. (2025). AI versus human feedback in mixed reality simulations: Comparing LLM and expert mentoring in preservice teacher education on controversial issues. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 1–33. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-025-00484-8
  20. Giannakos, M., Azevedo, R., Brusilovsky, P., Cukurova, M., Dimitriadis, Y., Hernandez-Leo, D., . . . , & Rienties, B. (2025). The promise and challenges of generative AI in education. Behaviour & Information Technology, 44(11), 2518–2544. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929X.2024.2394886
  21. Adeshola, I., & Adepoju, A. P. (2024). The opportunities and challenges of ChatGPT in education. Interactive Learning Environments, 32(10), 6159–6172. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2023.2253858
  22. M. Á, Jordán Enamorado. (2025). Improving English language proficiency through text-based activities with the help of ChatGPT. Nordic Journal of Digital Literacy, 20(1), 45–62. https://doi.org/10.18261/njdl.20.1.8
  23. Mei, P., Brewis, D. N., Nwaiwu, F., Sumanathilaka, D., Alva-Manchego, F., & Demaree-Cotton, J. (2025). If ChatGPT can do it, where is my creativity? Generative AI boosts performance but diminishes experience in creative writing. Computers in Human Behavior: Artificial Humans, 4, 100140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chbah.2025.100140
  24. Mao, J., Chen, B., & Liu, J. C. (2024). Generative artificial intelligence in education and its implications for assessment. TechTrends, 68(1), 58–66. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-023-00911-4
  25. Selwyn, N. (2024). On the limits of artificial intelligence (AI) in education. Nordisk tidsskrift for pedagogikk og kritikk, 10(1), 3–14. https://doi.org/10.23865/ntpk.v10.6062
  26. Creely, E. (2024). Exploring the role of generative AI in enhancing language learning: Opportunities and challenges. International Journal of Changes in Education, 1(3), 158–167. https://doi.org/10.47852/bonviewIJCE42022495
  27. 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
  28. Hopfenbeck, T. N., Zhang, Z., Sun, S. Z., Robertson, P., & McGrane, J. A. (2023). Challenges and opportunities for classroom-based formative assessment and AI: A perspective article. In Frontiers in Education, 8, 1270700. Frontiers Media SA. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2023.1270700
  29. Kim, J., Lee, H., & Cho, Y. H. (2022). Learning design to support student-AI collaboration: Perspectives of leading teachers for AI in education. Education and Information Technologies, 27(5), 6069–6104. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10831-6
  30. Wang, J., & Fan, W. (2025). The effect of ChatGPT on students’ learning performance, learning perception, and higher-order thinking: Insights from a meta-analysis. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 12(1), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-025-04787-y
  31. Nikolopoulou, K. (2024). Generative artificial intelligence in higher education: Exploring ways of harnessing pedagogical practices with the assistance of ChatGPT. International Journal of Changes in Education, 1(2), 103–111. https://doi.org/10.47852/bonviewIJCE42022489
  32. Hellström, T. (2024). AI and its consequences for the written word. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence, 6, 1326166. https://doi.org/10.3389/frai.2023.1326166
  33. Bastani, H., Bastani, O., Sungu, A., Ge, H., Kabakcı, Ö., & Mariman, R. (2024). Generative AI can harm learning. The Wharton School Research Paper. Available at SSRN, 4895486.
  34. Fan, Y., Tang, L., Le, H., Shen, K., Tan, S., Zhao, Y., . . . , & Gašević, D. (2025). Beware of metacognitive laziness: Effects of generative artificial intelligence on learning motivation, processes, and performance. British Journal of Educational Technology, 56(2), 489–530. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13544
  35. Bergmark, U., Graeske, C., Jonsson, J., Karlsson, M., Viklund, S., Wiklund, C., & Wikström, L. (2024). AI i undervisningen–från fusk till framtidstro. Forskning & utveckling i förskola och skola (Fufos), 3(2), 64–80.
  36. Witzenberger, K., & Gulson, K. N. (2021). Why EdTech is always right: Students, data and machines in pre-emptive configurations. Learning, Media and Technology, 46(4), 420–434. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2021.1913181
  37. Humble, N., & Mozelius, P. (2022). The threat, hype, and promise of artificial intelligence in education. Discover Artificial Intelligence, 2(1), 22. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44163-022-00039-z
  38. Akgun, S., & Greenhow, C. (2022). Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings. AI and Ethics, 2(3), 431–440. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43681-021-00096-7
  39. Lindell, T. L., & Utterberg Modén, M. (2025). Conflicting motives: Challenges of generative AI in education. Learning, Media and Technology, 50(3), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2024.2438933
  40. Utterberg Modén, M., Ponti, M., Lundin, J., & Tallvid, M. (2024). When fairness is an abstraction: Equity and AI in Swedish compulsory education. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 69(4), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/00313831.2024.2349908
  41. Glikson, E., & Woolley, A. W. (2020). Human trust in artificial intelligence: Review of empirical research. Academy of management annals, 14(2), 627–660. https://doi.org/10.5465/annals.2018.0057
  42. Klingbeil, A., Grützner, C., & Schreck, P. (2024). Trust and reliance on AI—An experimental study on the extent and costs of overreliance on AI. Computers in Human Behavior, 160, 108352. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2024.108352
  43. Schilke, O., & Reimann, M. (2025). The transparency dilemma: How AI disclosure erodes trust. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 188, 104405. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2025.104405
  44. Cukurova, M., Miao, X., & Brooker, R. (2023). Adoption of artificial intelligence in schools: Unveiling factors influencing teachers’ engagement. In International conference on artificial intelligence in education, 151–163. Springer Nature Switzerland. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-36272-9_13
  45. Ivarsson, J., & Lindwall, O. (2023). Suspicious minds: The problem of trust and conversational agents. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), 32(3), 545–571. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10606-023-09465-8
  46. Hosmer, L.T. (1995). Trust: The connecting link between organizational theory and philosophical ethics. Academy of Management Review, 20(2), 379–403. https://doi.org/10.2307/258851
  47. Nazaretsky, T., Cukurova, M., & Alexandron, G. (2022). An instrument for measuring teachers’ trust in AI-based educational technology. In LAK 2022 -12th International Learning Analytics and Knowledge Conference, 56–66. https://doi.org/10.1145/3506860.3506866
  48. Viberg, O., Cukurova, M., Feldman-Maggor, Y., Alexandron, G., Shirai, S., Kanemune, S., . . . , & Wasson, B. (2025). What explains teachers’ trust in AI in education across six countries? International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 35(3), 1288–1316. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-024-00433-x
  49. Lukyanenko, R., Maass, W., & Storey, V. C. (2022). Trust in artificial intelligence: From a Foundational Trust Framework to emerging research opportunities. Electronic Markets, 32(4), 1993–2020. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12525-022-00605-4
  50. Denscombe, M. (2017). EBOOK: The good research guide: For small-scale social research projects. UK: McGraw-Hill.
  51. Swedish Research Council [Vetenskapsrådet]. (2017). God forskningssed (Good research practice). Retrieved from God forskningssed – Vetenskapsrådet (vr.se)
  52. Clarke, V., & Braun, V. (2017). Thematic analysis. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 12(3), 297–298. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439760.2016.1262613

LICENSE

Creative Commons 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.