Gendered Self-Perceptions, Inclusive Classroom Climate, and Responsible Generative-AI Use in English for Specific Purposes
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.31004/jpion.v5i1.1071Keywords:
Gender Perception, Inclusive Classroom Climate, Vocational Higher Education, Generative AI, AI LiteracyAbstract
Gendered perceptions shape participation and belonging in higher education, and the rapid uptake of generative AI adds new equity and academic-integrity risks in English for Specific Purposes (ESP). This study examined how communal/agentic self-perceptions and perceived gender-inclusive classroom climate relate to responsible generative-AI orientations among Indonesian vocational students. A cross-sectional quantitative secondary analysis was conducted using an end-of-course survey (N=90) with reliability, descriptive, correlational, and regression analyses. Results indicated high communal and moderate agentic self-perceptions, generally positive inclusion perceptions with lingering stereotype signals in group tasks, and high perceived AI utility alongside strong concerns about inaccurate and biased outputs. Inclusion climate and perceived AI utility jointly predicted stronger governance-oriented norms (e.g., disclosure, citation, fairness). Scenario judgments rated AI most acceptable for summarizing, translating, and language correction when students revised/verified outputs, and least acceptable for generating whole reports or slide decks without meaningful authorship.
References
Abele, A. E., & Wojciszke, B. (2014). Chapter Four - Communal and Agentic Content in Social Cognition: A Dual Perspective Model. In J. M. Olson & M. P. Zanna (Eds.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (Vol. 50, pp. 195–255). Academic Press. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-800284-1.00004-7
Alshammari, S., & Alshammari, M. (2024). Factors Affecting the Adoption and Use of ChatGPT in Higher Education. International Journal of Information and Communication Technology Education, 20, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJICTE.339557
An, Y., Yu, J. H., & James, S. (2025). Investigating the higher education institutions’ guidelines and policies regarding the use of generative AI in teaching, learning, research, and administration. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 22(1), 10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-025-00507-3
Atzmüller, C., & Steiner, P. M. (2010). Experimental Vignette Studies in Survey Research. Methodology, 6(3), 128–138. https://doi.org/10.1027/1614-2241/a000014
Barus, O. P., Hidayanto, A. N., Handri, E. Y., Sensuse, D. I., & Yaiprasert, C. (2025). Shaping generative AI governance in higher education: Insights from student perception. International Journal of Educational Research Open, 8, 100452. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedro.2025.100452
Bem, S. L. (1981). Gender schema theory: A cognitive account of sex typing. Psychological Review, 88(4). https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.88.4.354
Carifio, J., & Perla, R. (2009). Resolving the 50-year Debate Around using and Misusing Likert Scales. Medical Education, 42, 1150–1152. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2923.2008.03172.x
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates. Lawrence Earlbaum Associates.
Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika, 16(3). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02310555
Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly: Management Information Systems, 13(3). https://doi.org/10.2307/249008
Deep, P. Das, Edgington, W. D., Ghosh, N., & Rahaman, Md. S. (2025). Evaluating the Effectiveness and Ethical Implications of AI Detection Tools in Higher Education. Information, 16(10), 905. https://doi.org/10.3390/info16100905
DeVellis, R. F. (2017). Scale Development: Theory and Applications (4th ed.). In SAGE Publication.
Durrani, N., & Kataeva, Z. (2025). STEM teachers’ agency for gender equality in STEM education: A mixed-methods study. International Journal of Educational Research, 131, 102585. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2025.102585
Eagly, A. H. (1987). Sex Differences in Social Behavior: A Social-role interpretation. Psychology Press. In Sustainability (Switzerland) (Vol. 11, Number 1).
Eagly, A. H., & Wood, W. (2012). Social Role Theory. In Handbook of Theories of Social Psychology (pp. 458–476). SAGE Publications Ltd. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446249222.n49
Eke, D. (2023). ChatGPT and the rise of generative AI: Threat to academic integrity? Journal of Responsible Technology, 100060.
Enamorado, M. Á. J. (2025). Development of Linguistic Competence in English for Specific Purposes Through ChatGPT: A Case Study. Journal of Language and Education, 11(1), 85–100. https://doi.org/10.17323/jle.2025.23745
Ergin, M., & Koskan, Ö. (2023). Comparison of Student – t, Welch s t, and Mann – Whitney U Tests in Terms of Type I Error Rate and Test Power. Selcuk Journal of Agricultural and Food Sciences. https://doi.org/10.15316/sjafs.2023.022
Etikan, I., Musa, S.A., Alkassim, R. S. (2016). Comparison of Convenience Sampling and Purposive Sampling Comparison of Convenience Sampling and Purposive Sampling. American Journal of Theoretical and Applied Statistics, 5(1).
Florian, L., & Black-Hawkins, K. (2011). Exploring inclusive pedagogy. British Educational Research Journal, 37(5). https://doi.org/10.1080/01411926.2010.501096
Floridi, L., Cowls, J., Beltrametti, M., Chatila, R., Chazerand, P., Dignum, V., Luetge, C., Madelin, R., Pagallo, U., Rossi, F., Schafer, B., Valcke, P., & Vayena, E. (2018). AI4People—An Ethical Framework for a Good AI Society: Opportunities, Risks, Principles, and Recommendations. Minds and Machines, 28(4). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11023-018-9482-5
Garrison, D. R., & Kanuka, H. (2004). Blended learning: Uncovering its transformative potential in higher education. Internet and Higher Education, 7(2). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2004.02.001
Goodenow, C. (1993). The psychological sense of school membership among adolescents: Scale development and educational correlates. Psychology in the Schools, 30(1). https://doi.org/10.1002/1520-6807(199301)30:1<79::AID-PITS2310300113>3.0.CO;2-X
Gruenhagen, J. H., Sinclair, P. M., Carroll, J. A., Baker, P. R. A., Wilson, A., & Demant, D. (2024). The rapid rise of generative AI and its implications for academic integrity: Students’ perceptions and use of chatbots for assistance with assessments. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2024.100273
Habibi, A., Muhaimin, M., Danibao, B. K., Wibowo, Y. G., Wahyuni, S., & Octavia, A. (2023). ChatGPT in higher education learning: Acceptance and use. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2023.100190
Hadinejad, N., Sperling, K., & McGrath, C. (2025). Generative AI chatbots in higher education: Student experiences and perceived ethical challenges. Computers and Education Open, 9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeo.2025.100311
Hz, B. (2022). Exploring Gender Differences in Public Speaking Anxiety. Sawwa: Jurnal Studi Gender, 17, 247–266. https://doi.org/10.21580/sa.v17i2.14295
Jackson-Summers, A. G., Mrakovcich, K. L., Gray, J. P., Fleischmann, C. M., Emami, T., & Page, E. J. (2024). A systematic review of inclusive pedagogical research using the CIRTL inclusive pedagogy framework: multi-disciplinary and STEM perspectives, current trends and a research agenda. Discover Education, 3(1), 30. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44217-024-00093-y
Jean, G. (2025). The Impact of Gender-Sensitive Education on Leadership Development.
Jin, Y., Yan, L., Echeverria, V., Gašević, D., & Martinez-Maldonado, R. (2025). Generative AI in higher education: A global perspective of institutional adoption policies and guidelines. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 8, 100348. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2024.100348
Jobin, A., Ienca, M., & Vayena, E. (2019). The global landscape of AI ethics guidelines. Nature Machine Intelligence, 1(9). https://doi.org/10.1038/s42256-019-0088-2
Johnston, M. P. (2014). Secondary Data Analysis : A Method of which the Time Has Come. Qualitatve and Quantative Methods in Libraryes (QQML), 3.
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., … Kasneci, G. (2023). ChatGPT for good? On opportunities and challenges of large language models for education. In Learning and Individual Differences (Vol. 103). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2023.102274
Krecar, I. M., Kolega, M., & Jurcec, L. (2024). Perception of ChatGPT Usage for Homework Assignments: Students’ and Professors’ Perspectives. IAFOR Journal of Education, 12(2). https://doi.org/10.22492/ije.12.2.02
Kuteesa, K., Akpuokwe, C., & Udeh, C. (2024). GENDER EQUITY IN EDUCATION: ADDRESSING CHALLENGES AND PROMOTING OPPORTUNITIES FOR SOCIAL EMPOWERMENT. International Journal of Applied Research in Social Sciences, 6, 631–641. https://doi.org/10.51594/ijarss.v6i4.1034
Laupichler, M. C., Aster, A., Schirch, J., & Raupach, T. (2022). Artificial intelligence literacy in higher and adult education: A scoping literature review. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 3, 100101. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2022.100101
Li, J., Huang, J., Wu, W., & Whipple, P. B. (2024). Evaluating the role of ChatGPT in enhancing EFL writing assessments in classroom settings: A preliminary investigation. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 11(1), 1268. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-03755-2
Li, J., Wang, C., & Shen, Z. (2025). Gender Stereotypes as Related to Language Learning Engagement: Mediating Roles of Motivational Beliefs and Emotional Factors. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 34(3), 909–920. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-024-00907-5
Likert, R. (1932). A technique for the measurement of attitudes. Archives of Psychology, 140.
Margas, N. (2023). Inclusive classroom climate development as the cornerstone of inclusive school building: review and perspectives. Frontiers in Psychology, Volume 14-2023. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/psychology/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1171204
Marsh, H. W. (1987). Students’ evaluations of University teaching: Research findings, methodological issues, and directions for future research. In International Journal of Educational Research (Vol. 11, Number 3). https://doi.org/10.1016/0883-0355(87)90001-2
Mavrou, K., Theodorou, E., Mouka, M., & Liasidou, A. (2025). Accessibility and universal design in higher education curricula: implications for inclusion/exclusion. Teaching in Higher Education, 30(8), 1909–1929. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2025.2507244
McBrien, J., & Brussini, O. (2022). Gender stereotypes in education: Policies and practices to address gender stereotyping across OECD education systems.
Meyer, M. W., & Norman, D. (2020). Changing Design Education for the 21st Century. She Ji: The Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation, 6(1), 13–49. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sheji.2019.12.002
Rahmanu, I. W. E. D., & Molnár, G. (2025). English for Specific Purposes Needs in Vocational Higher Education: Uncovering Urgency, Variance, and Skill Priorities Through Listening and Reading Data. https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-7269299/v1
Setia, M. S. (2016). Methodology series module 3: Cross-sectional studies. Indian Journal of Dermatology, 61(3). https://doi.org/10.4103/0019-5154.182410
Stewart, R., Wright, B., Smith, L., Roberts, S., & Russell, N. (2021). Gendered stereotypes and norms: A systematic review of interventions designed to shift attitudes and behaviour. Heliyon, 7(4), e06660. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e06660
Strzelecki, A. (2023). Students’ Acceptance of ChatGPT in Higher Education: An Extended Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology. Innovative Higher Education, 49, 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-023-09686-1
Tsao, J. (2025). Trajectories of AI policy in higher education: Interpretations, discourses, and enactments of students and teachers. Computers and Education Artificial Intelligence, 9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2025.100496
UNESCO. (2023). Guidance for generative AI in education and research. In Guidance for generative AI in education and research. https://doi.org/10.54675/ewzm9535
Vaikre, B. S., Eisenschmidt, E., Kollmayer, M., Tali, M.-L., & Carpelan, R. (2026). Gender Beliefs and Gender-Related Practices: Insights from Teachers and Leaders of One Estonian School. Education Sciences, 16(1), 121. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci16010121
Wahdah, S. I., Kurniawan, R. Y., & Irawan, N. (2025). Adoption of ChatGPT in Higher Education: Insights from the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology Model. Indonesian Journal on Learning and Advanced Education (IJOLAE), 312–327. https://doi.org/10.23917/ijolae.v7i2.9743
Wang, L., & Yu, Z. (2023). Gender-moderated effects of academic self-concept on achievement, motivation, performance, and self-efficacy: A systematic review. Frontiers in Psychology, Volume 14-2023. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/psychology/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1136141
Wolter, I. B., & Hannover, B. (2016). Gender role self-concept at school start and its impact on academic self-concept and performance in mathematics and reading. European Journal of Developmental Psychology, 13(6), 681–703. https://doi.org/10.1080/17405629.2016.1175343
Yates, M. S., Fitzsimmons, T. W., Callan, V. J., & Green, T. (2025). Beliefs About the Origins and Achievement of Gender Equality: A Qualitative Inquiry Among Adolescents Attending Elite Single-Sex Schools. Sex Roles, 91(10), 73. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-025-01620-3
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Annisa Romadloni, Linda Perdana Wanti, Laura Sari
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
