The adoption of ChatGPT in higher education can no longer be understood merely as a matter of technological availability, but rather as a complex phenomenon shaped by faculty competencies, institutional conditions, and perceptions of usefulness, privacy, and pedagogical value.
The article by Abdulaziz Alzahrani and Amal Alzahrani, published in RIED, examines this very tension through a sample of 569 instructors from Saudi universities, using the UTAUT2 model and the TPACK framework to study the factors that influence faculty members’ intention to incorporate ChatGPT into their teaching. The research is based on a clear premise: generative artificial intelligence tools can provide personalized support, automate tasks, expand resources, and enrich learning, but their effective integration depends on much more than technological enthusiasm.
One of the most interesting contributions of the study is that not all the factors usually associated with technology acceptance proved to be significant. Effort expectancy, social influence, hedonic motivation, and information quality did not have a relevant impact on intention to use.
By contrast, performance expectancy, facilitating conditions, learning value (with a negative effect) and privacy risk were determining factors. This last result is especially relevant because it shows that the adoption of ChatGPT in universities is shaped by ethical and organizational concerns: it is not enough for the tool to appear useful; there must also be trust, institutional support, adequate resources, and clarity regarding data protection.
The role of TPACK adds a decisive layer to the analysis. Although this technological-pedagogical knowledge should facilitate the integration of emerging technologies, the study finds a direct negative effect on intention to use and a significant moderating role in the relationship between privacy risk and behavioral intention. This suggests that instructors with greater pedagogical and technological awareness may also be more critical of the risks associated with ChatGPT, especially regarding privacy, educational quality, and human interaction.
For this reason, the article concludes with a key recommendation: universities should promote professional development programs that do not merely teach the technical use of AI, but help faculty integrate it in a pedagogically sound, ethical, and safe way. Ultimately, ChatGPT can transform university teaching, but its adoption will depend on institutions’ ability to support faculty throughout that process.
---
How to Cite: Alzahrani, A., & Alzahrani , A. (2025). Understanding ChatGPT adoption in universities: the impact of faculty TPACK and UTAUT2. RIED-Revista Iberoamericana de Educación a Distancia, 28(1), 37–58. https://doi.org/10.5944/ried.28.1.41498
