Perceived Usefulness of ChatGPT for Learning Physics Components of Basic Science among Junior Secondary Students
Main Article Content
Abstract
Background. The increasing use of generative AI in education has created new opportunities for students to obtain academic support beyond conventional classroom interaction. ChatGPT, in particular, can provide explanations, examples and assistance with academic tasks. However, limited evidence exists on how junior secondary school students perceive its usefulness for learning the Physics components of Basic Science, particularly within the Nigerian context. Objective. This study therefore examined students’ perceptions of ChatGPT as a learning support tool, with specific attention to its perceived usefulness for assignment and examination preparation and for learning Physics. Method. The study adopted a quantitative approach using a descriptive survey research design. The participants comprised 171 students from a purposively selected secondary school in Ibadan, Nigeria. Data were collected using a self-developed Students’ Perceptions of ChatGPT as a Learning Support Tool Questionnaire (SPC-LSTQ). A pilot study was conducted and analysed using Cronbach’s alpha, yielding reliability coefficients of 0.82 for Part One and 0.84 for Part Two. The data were analysed using frequency counts, percentages, means and standard deviations in SPSS. A criterion mean of 2.50 was used to interpret the four-point Likert-scale responses. Results. The findings revealed an overall positive perception of ChatGPT for assignment and examination preparation (weighted mean = 2.95). Students also reported a positive perception of ChatGPT for learning Physics (weighted mean = 3.01). Conclusion. The findings indicate that the participating junior secondary school students perceived ChatGPT as a useful learning support tool for both academic tasks and learning Physics components of Basic Science. However, these positive perceptions represent students’ reported views and should not be interpreted as evidence of improved learning achievement or the accuracy of ChatGPT-generated responses.
Article Details

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
References
Al-Abdullatif, A. M., & Alsubaie, M. A. (2024). ChatGPT in Learning: Assessing Students’ Use Intentions through the Lens of Perceived Value and the Influence of AI Literacy. Behavioral Sciences, 14(9), 845. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs14090845.
Alabi, A. J., Adelekan, A. T., & Olotu, G. (2025). Transforming Social Studies Pedagogy: Artificial Intelligence-Based tool and Students’ Academic Performance in Ondo State. ETDC: Indonesian Journal of Research and Educational Review, 5(1), 45–54. https://doi.org/10.51574/ijrer.v5i1.3988
Aybek, E. C., & Toraman, C. (2022). How many response categories are sufficient for Likert type scales? An empirical study based on the Item Response Theory. International Journal of Assessment Tools in Education, 9(2), 534–547. https://doi.org/10.21449/ijate.1132931
Ayoola, Y. A., Mufutaudeen, T., Ajibade, A. T., & Oluwatoyin, I. P. (2026). Perception of Difficult Physics Topics and their Remediation by Senior Secondary School Teachers and Students in Ilesa West, Osun State, Nigeria. Jigawa Journal of Educational Research, 5(2B), 78-87.
Cohen, A., Soffer, T., & Henderson, M. (2022). Students’ use of technology and their perceptions of its usefulness in higher education: International comparison. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 38(5), 1321–1331. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12678
Cordero, J., Torres-Zambrano, J., & Cordero-Castillo, A. (2024). Integration of Generative Artificial Intelligence in Higher Education: Best Practices. Education Sciences, 15(1), 32. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15010032
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2022). Research Design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (6th ed.). SAGE Publications. https://www.sagepub.com/shop/buy-a-book/research-design-6-270550
Dahlkemper, M. N., Lahme, S. Z., & Klein, P. (2023). How do physics students evaluate artificial intelligence responses on comprehension questions? A study on the perceived scientific accuracy and linguistic quality of ChatGPT. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 19(1), 010142. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.19.010142
Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology. Management Information Systems Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008
Ding, L., Li, T., Jiang, S., & Gapud, A. (2023). Students’ perceptions of using ChatGPT in a physics class as a virtual tutor. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 20(1), 63. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-023-00434-1
Egara, F. O., Mosimege, M., & Mosia, M. (2025). Secondary school students’ perceptions of their usage of artificial intelligence-based ChatGPT in mathematics learning. Journal of Education, (98), 124–146. https://doi.org/10.17159/2520-9868/i98a07
Ezurike, N., & Akinsulire, T. (2024). Investigating the awareness and adoption of ChatGPT as a learning tool among undergraduates in Lagos State, Nigeria. International Journal of Education, Learning and Development, 12(9), 134-154.
Federal Ministry of Education. (2023). National digital learning policy. Federal Republic of Nigeria. https://education.gov.ng/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/MM-National-Digital-Learning-Policy-Final-Draft-2.0.pdf
Federal Ministry of Education. (2025). National EdTech strategy (2025–2030). Federal Republic of Nigeria. https://edutech.education.gov.ng/
Heung, Y. M. E., & Chiu, T. K. F. (2025). How ChatGPT impacts student engagement from a systematic review and meta-analysis study. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 8, 100361. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2025.100361
Ishengoma, F. (2024). Revisiting the TAM: Adapting the model to advanced technologies and evolving user behaviours. The Electronic Library, 42(6), 1055–1073. https://doi.org/10.1108/EL-06-2024-0166
Javaid, M., Haleem, A., Singh, R. P., Khan, S., & Khan, I. H. (2023). Unlocking the opportunities through ChatGPT Tool towards ameliorating the education system. BenchCouncil Transactions on Benchmarks, Standards and Evaluations, 3(2), 100115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tbench.2023.100115
Kankaraš, M., & Capecchi, S. (2025). Neither agree nor disagree: Use and misuse of the neutral response category in Likert-type scales. METRON, 83(1), 111–140. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40300-024-00276-5
Kebede, W. (2023). Investigating female learners’ attitude and challenges towards mathematics at the department of mathematics, Injibara college of teachers’ education, Injibara, Ethiopia. Cogent Education, 10(2), 2256202. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2023.2256202
Lo, C. K., Yu, P. L. H., Xu, S., Ng, D. T. K., & Jong, M. S. (2024). Exploring the application of ChatGPT in ESL/EFL education and related research issues: A systematic review of empirical studies. Smart Learning Environments, 11(1), 50. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-024-00342-5
López-Santiago, J., De Francisco Alonso, M., Zubelzu-Minguez, S., Ruiz-Garcia, L., & Gómez-Villarino, M. T. (2024). Fostering sustainable development values among engineering students using Service-Learning. Frontiers in Education, 9, 1408896. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2024.1408896
Maheshwari, G. (2024). Factors influencing students’ intention to adopt and use ChatGPT in higher education: A study in the Vietnamese context. Education and Information Technologies, 29(10), 12167–12195. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-12333-z
McNeill, P., & Chapman, S. (2005). Research Methods (0 ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203463000
Oladejo, A. I., Okebukola, P. A., Akinola, V. O., Amusa, J. O., Akintoye, H., Owolabi, T., Shabani, J., & Olateju, T. T. (2023). Changing the Narratives of Physics-Learning in Secondary Schools: The Role of Culture, Technology, and Locational Context. Education Sciences, 13(2), 146. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13020146
Pius, P. O. (2026). Effect of teacher-guided use of AI chatbots on secondary school students'academic achievement in chemistry in Onitsha Education Zone. UNIZIK Journal of STM Education, 99-111.
Shahzad, M. F., Xu, S., & Asif, M. (2025). Factors affecting generative artificial intelligence, such as CHATGPT , use in higher education: An application of technology acceptance model. British Educational Research Journal, 51(2), 489–513. https://doi.org/10.1002/berj.4084
Şimşek, A. S., Cengiz, G. Ş. T., & Bal, M. (2025). Extending the TAM framework: Exploring learning motivation and agility in educational adoption of generative AI. Education and Information Technologies, 30(15), 20913–20942. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-025-13591-9
Yan, L., Greiff, S., Teuber, Z., & Gašević, D. (2024). Promises and challenges of generative artificial intelligence for human learning. Nature Human Behaviour, 8(10), 1839–1850. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-024-02004-5
Yu, C., Yan, J., & Cai, N. (2024). ChatGPT in higher education: Factors influencing ChatGPT user satisfaction and continued use intention. Frontiers in Education, 9, 1354929. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2024.1354929