Between Informal Practices and Educational Institutions: The Acceptability of GAI Among Secondary School Students

Article Sidebar

PDF (Français)
Published: Oct 24, 2026
DOI: https://doi.org/10.52358/mm.vi24.534
Keywords:
generative artificial intelligence in education educational uses and non-uses social acceptability education

Main Article Content

Marc Trestini
Université de Strasbourg
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2259-2356

Abstract

This article analyzes the representations, uses, and non-uses of generative artificial intelligence (GAI) among secondary school students in France. The study is based on data from a questionnaire administered at the end of 2024 to 1,159 middle and high school students in the Grand Est region, nearly two-thirds of whom reported using GAI. As part of a critical approach to digital technology in education, the study uses a social acceptability model inspired by the work of Venkatesh, enriched by variables related to the ethics and transparency of these tools. The results show that the reported uses mainly involve a pragmatic appropriation of AI tools, geared towards homework assistance, content reformulation, and information search, most often outside of formal educational settings. These practices respond to the logic of academic efficiency and time saving, while raising issues related to cognitive autonomy and understanding the limitations of technology. Non-uses appear to be varied, linked to ethical concerns, the value placed on personal effort, or institutional fears. The article highlights tensions between informal uses and uncertain educational frameworks and emphasizes the need for critical and reflective education on GAI.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Article Details

How to Cite
Trestini, M. (2026). Between Informal Practices and Educational Institutions: The Acceptability of GAI Among Secondary School Students. Mediations and Mediatizations, (24), 66–92. https://doi.org/10.52358/mm.vi24.534
Issue
No. 24 (2026): Educational Digital Technology Under Critical Scrutiny
Section
Research articles
Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Author Biography

Marc Trestini, Université de Strasbourg

Marc Trestini is a professor of information and communication sciences at the National Higher Institute for Teaching and Education (INSPÉ), a component of the University of Strasbourg. He is an elected member of the National Council of Universities (71st section) and director of the Inter-University Laboratory of Educational and Communication Sciences (LISEC-UR 2310). He also leads the IA2GE Digital Technology Working Group, supported by the Directorate for Digital Education (DNE/TNE) of the Ministry of National Education. This working group focuses on the uses and non-uses of generative artificial intelligence and major conversational and/or multimodal language models in schools in the Grand Est region. His research more generally concerns the mediation and dissemination of knowledge, that is, the tools used in communication within the fields of education and training.

References

Arrieta, A. B., Díaz-Rodríguez, N., Del Ser, J., Bennetot, A., Tabik, S., Barbado, Garcia, S., Gil-Lopez, S., Molina, D., Benjamins, R., Chatila, R., et Herrera, F. (2020). Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI): Concepts, taxonomies, opportunities and challenges toward responsables AI. Information Fusion, 58, 82-115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.inffus.2019.12.012 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.inffus.2019.12.012

Baudet, C., Jeanneret Medina, M. et Delaloye, M. (2023). Des IA et des Hommes. AIM 2023, Association Information et Management, May 2023, Dijon, France. Sous licence CC BY. https://hal.science/hal-04167777

Bewersdorff, A., Zhai X., Roberts, J. et Nerdel, C. (2023). Myths, mis- and preconceptions of artificial intelligence: A review of the literature. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2023.100143 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2023.100143

Blut, M., Chong, A. Y. L., Tsigna, Z., et Venkatesh, V. (2022). Meta-Analysis of the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT): Challenging its Validity and Charting a Research Agenda in the Red Ocean. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 23(1), 13-95. https://doi.org/10.17705/1JAIS.00719 DOI: https://doi.org/10.17705/1jais.00719

Boudokhane, F. (2006). Comprendre le non-usage technique : réflexions théoriques. Les Enjeux de l'information et de la communication, 1, 13-22. https://doi.org/10.3917/enic.006.0013 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3917/enic.006.0013

Carcary, M. et Buckland, P. (2025). Perceived Risk of Generative AI Adoption in Initial Teacher Education Programmes. Dans F. Matos, I. Flores et S. Martins (dir.) Actes de la 2e Conférence internationale sur la recherche en éducation, 2(1) - ICER 2025. https://papers.academic-conferences.org/index.php/icer/article/view/4162/3838

Chan, C. K. Y. et Hu, W. (2023). Students’ voices on generative AI: perceptions, benefits, and challenges in higher education. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 20, Article 43. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-023-00411-8 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-023-00411-8

Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319‑340. https://www.jstor.org/stable/249008 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/249008

Depelteau, F. (2003). La démarche d’une recherche en sciences humaines. De la question de départ à la communication des résultats. Editions De Boeck.

Dhar, V. (2023, 2 août). The Paradigm Shifts in Artificial Intelligence. ArXiv. https://arxiv.org/abs/2308.02558v1

Fetaji, M. (2023). Dеvising a Modеl AI-UTAUT by Combining Artificial Inteligence AI with Unifiеd Thеory of Accеptancе and Usе of Tеchnology (UTAUT). SAR Journal – Science and Research, 3, 182-187. https://doi.org/10.18421/SAR63-06 DOI: https://doi.org/10.18421/SAR63-06

Flichy, P. (2003). L’Innovation technique : récents développements en sciences sociales, vers une nouvelle théorie de l'innovation. La Découverte. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3917/dec.flich.2003.01

Holmes, W., Porayska-Pomsta, K., Holstein, K., Sutherland, E., Baker, T., Shum, S. B., Koedinger, K. R. et al. (2021). Ethics of AI in education: Towards a community-wide framework. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 32, 504-526. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-021-00239-1 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-021-00239-1

Kamalov, F., et Gurrib, I. (2023). A New Era of Artificial Intelligence in Education: A Multifaceted Revolution. arXiv. http://arxiv.org/abs/2305.18303 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su151612451

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. Learning and Individual Differences, 103, 13 22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2023.102274 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2023.102274

Lo, C. K. (2023). What Is the Impact of ChatGPT on Education? A Rapid Review of the Literature. Education Sciences, 13(4), 410. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13040410 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13040410

Martin, O. (2020). L’analyse quantitative des données (5e éd.). Paris : Armand Colin. DOI: https://doi.org/10.14375/NP.9782200629557

Mogavi, R. H., Deng, C., Kim, J. J., Zhou, P., Kwon, Y. D., Metwally, A. H. S., Tlili, A., Bassanelli, S., Bucchiarone, A., Gujar, S., Nacke, L. E., et Hui, P. (2023). Exploring User Perspectives on ChatGPT: Applications, Perceptions, and Implications for AI-Integrated Education. arXiv. http://arxiv.org/abs/2305.13114

Mohamadi, S., Mujtaba, G., Le, N., Doretto, G., et Adjeroh, D. A. (2023). Chatgpt in the age of generative ai and large language models: A concise survey. arXiv. http://arxiv.org/abs/2307.04251

Proulx, S. (2005). Penser les usages des TIC aujourd’hui : enjeux, modèles, tendances. Dans L. Vieira et N. Pinède (dir.), Enjeux et usages des TIC : aspects sociaux et culturels, 1, 7-20. Presses universitaires de Bordeaux.

Rabardel, P. (1995). Les hommes et les technologies : approche cognitive des instruments contemporains. Armand Colin.

Trestini, M. (2012). Causes de non-usage des TICE à l’Université : des changements? Cas des enseignants du supérieur. Recherches et Educations, 6, 15-33. https://journals.openedition.org/rechercheseducations/935 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4000/rechercheseducations.935

Trestini, M., Magot, C-A., Zeyringer, M., Plateau, J.-F., Frisch, M., Connan, P.-Y., Emprin, F., Promonet, A., Bergey, J.-L. P., Viallon, P., Sidhom, S., Coulibaly, B., Denami, M., Sabra, H., Mazziotti, S., Collin, A., Bannier, N., Rabin, É., Grandadam, A., et Deas, D. (2025). Résultats de l’enquête enseignants élèves sur les usages et non-usages des IAG dans la Région académique Grand-Est. GTnum IA2GE de la Direction du numérique éducatif du MENESR (p. 82). GTnum IA2GE de la Direction du numérique éducatif du Ministère de l’Éducation nationale, de l’Enseignement supérieur et de la Recherche (France). https://hal.science/hal-05062217v2

Trestini, M. et Zeyringer, M. (2026). Les professeurs des écoles en France et l’intelligence artificielle : y a-t-il une influence d’ordre éthique sur les intentions d’usage et l’utilisation effective? STICEF : Sciences et technologies de l’Information et de la communication pour l’éducation et la formation, 33(1). https://doi.org/10.23709/STICEF.33.1.1

Tricot, A., Plégat-Soutjis, F., Camps, J.-F., Amiel, A., Lutz, G. et Morcillo, A., (2003). Utilité, utilisabilité, acceptabilité : interpréter les relations entre trois dimensions de l’évaluation des EIAH. Dans C. Desmoulins, P. Marquet, et D. Bouhineau (dir.), Actes de la conférence européenne sur les EIAH, 391-402. Strasbourg, 15-17 avril 2003. Paris, France : ATIEF, INRP.

Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., et Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425-478. https://doi.org/10.2307/30036540 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/30036540

Von Eschenbach, W. J. (2021). Transparency and the Black Box Problem: Why We Do Not Trust AI. Philosophy & Technology, 34, 1607-1622. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-021-00477-0 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-021-00477-0

Venkatesh, V., Thong, J. Y. L., et Xu, X. (2012). Consumer acceptance and use of information technology: extending the unified theory. MIS Quarterly, 36(1), 157-178. https://doi.org/10.2307/41410412 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/41410412

Venkatesh, V. (2022). Adoption and use of AI tools: a research agenda grounded in UTAUT. Annals of Operations Research, 308, 641–652. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-020-03918-9 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-020-03918-9

Wang, J., Hu, X., Hou, W., Chen, H., Zheng, R., Wang, Y., Yang, L., Huang, H., Ye, W., Geng, X., Jiao, B., Zhang, Y., et Xie, X. (2023). On the Robustness of ChatGPT: An Adversarial and Out-of-distribution Perspective. arXiv. http://arxiv.org/abs/2302.12095