Exploring the Relevance of Chatgpt in Student-Teacher Education: A Case Study of Federal College of Education, Yola

framework. This confirms Crcek and Patekar's observation that paraphrasing is a common — but not dominant — form of ChatGPT use (Crcek & Patekar, 2023). Among Nigerian student-teachers, Ya'u and Mohammed similarly found that while over 75 % of students used AI writing tools, only a minority invested effort in deeply reworking the output (Ya’u & Mohammed, 2025). The implication for academic integrity at FCE Yola is non-trivial: a substantial proportion of student-teachers may be submitting texts whose structure, vocabulary and sequencing were determined by an AI model rather than by the student. 6.4 Merits of ChatGPT on Academic Performance Despite their admitted misuse patterns, participants were overwhelmingly positive about the academic benefits of ChatGPT. Across the four groups, the following merits were consistently highlighted: 1. Time management and productivity — 'It helps me finish my assignments before deadline, especially when there's network and multiple courses to attend to.' 2. Concept clarification — 'When I don't understand a topic from the textbook, I ask ChatGPT and it explains like a teacher.' 3. Improved writing quality — participants noted that ChatGPT improved their grammar, sentence structure and academic tone; this is consistent with Chan (Chan, 2023), who found that students generally agreed AI tools can help them become 'better writers.' 4. Access to information beyond textbooks — useful where library materials are limited. 5. Generation of ideas and outlines — for unfamiliar or difficult topics. 6. 24/7 availability — 'Unlike lecturers, it doesn't sleep.' These perceived merits align closely with the wider literature. Baidoo-Anu and Owusu Ansah (Baidoo-Anu & Ansah, 2023) emphasised ChatGPT's potential to individualise instruction, promote engagement, and foster critical thinking; Kasneci et al. (Kasneci et al., 2023) noted its capacity to enhance student engagement and personalise learning experiences; and Abdulmumin and Abdulrahman (Abdulmumin & Abdulrahman, 2025) found that Nigerian undergraduates primarily used ChatGPT for 'simplifying learning processes, gaining conceptual clarity and completing assignments.' 6.5 Demerits of ChatGPT on Academic Performance When asked specifically about drawbacks, participants acknowledged several serious concerns: • Inaccurate or fabricated information — 'Some of the things ChatGPT tells me are completely wrong, especially citations.' This echoes the concern that ChatGPT frequently cannot cite sources accurately (Ngo, 2023). • Promotion of academic dishonesty — 'It makes students lazy; you can give ChatGPT the question and it writes the whole thing for you.' • Weakening of independent reasoning and originality — 'If I always depend on it, my brain will stop working.' This mirrors Ya'u and Mohammed's caution that excessive AI use may weaken students' independent literacy development (Ya’u & Mohammed, 2025). • Internet and financial barriers — 'Network is a serious issue in Yola. Sometimes I can't even log in for days.' Ajani and Ramaila (Ajani & Ramaila, 2025) reported similar access- related barriers among Nigerian undergraduates. • Plagiarism detection risk — 'I'm scared that one day our lecturers will run our work through a detector and catch us.' Stöhr et al. (Stöhr et al., 2024) found that 61.9 % of students in a multi-institution survey considered using chatbots to complete assignments and exams to be cheating. • Over-reliance and addiction — several participants noted they had stopped making genuine effort on drafts before consulting ChatGPT. This mixed picture supports the SWOT analysis by Farrokhnia et al., which identified accuracy, security, and the risk of losing human interaction as major threats that must be managed for successful educational adoption of ChatGPT. It also aligns with Cooper (Cooper, 2023), who questioned the veracity and accuracy of ChatGPT-generated data in science education. 6.6 Overall Benefits of ChatGPT to Academic Progress When invited to summarise their views, participants converged on a balanced position: ChatGPT is a powerful tool whose benefits outweigh its drawbacks only if used responsibly and critically. The benefits were summarised thematically as follows. Theme Illustrative Participant Voice Supporting Literature Enhanced productivity and time-saving 'It reduces the time I spend struggling with how to start an assignment.' (Baidoo-Anu & Ansah, 2023; Rabiev et al., 2025) Improved grammar and academic writing 'My English has improved because of how it structures sentences.' (Apata & Oyedele, 2025; Ya’u & Mohammed, 2025) Conceptual scaffolding for difficult topics 'When the lecturer doesn't explain well, ChatGPT does.' (Baidoo-Anu & Ansah, 2023; Kasneci et al., 2023) Personalised, on-demand learning support 'It's like having a private tutor that is always available.' (Chan, 2023) Brainstorming and idea generation 'It gives me angles I would not have thought of on my own.' (Chan, 2023) Exposure to diverse perspectives 'I can ask it to argue a topic from a different point of view.' (Chan, 2023) These benefits mirror the findings of Rabiev et al. (Rabiev et al., 2025), who reported that 71.3 % of students chiefly used ChatGPT for writing assignments or essays and 53 % rated it as very helpful in improving assignment quality, and Chan (Chan, 2023), who reported strong student agreement that AI tools help save time, improve writing, and provide unique insights. At the Nigerian tertiary level specifically, Abdulmumin and Abdulrahman (Abdulmumin & Abdulrahman, 2025) found that students held favourable perceptions and positive attitudes toward ChatGPT, using it primarily for simplifying learning, gaining conceptual clarity, and completing assignments. However, participants were unanimous that, beyond these benefits, responsible usage, lecturer awareness, and clear institutional guidelines are needed. Without these, the demerits identified under Research Question 5 — plagiarism, inaccuracy, over-reliance and loss of independent reasoning — will likely outweigh any marginal academic gains. 7. Summary, Conclusion and Recommendations 7.1 Summary The focus-group research at FCE Yola revealed that: • ChatGPT is widely used among student-teachers, but mostly in an unreflective, non- paraphrased manner. • The majority do not fully read or comprehend the outputs they obtain, raising concerns about deep learning. • Participants recognise both significant merits (productivity, clarity, writing quality) and significant demerits (inaccuracy, plagiarism risk, dependency). • Overall, ChatGPT is viewed as a beneficial academic tool only when combined with critical engagement, lecturer guidance, and institutional policy. 7.2 Conclusion The findings support — and extend — the existing literature on ChatGPT in African teacher- education contexts (Ajani & Ramaila, 2025; Obed et al., 2025; Pesce & Blanco, 2024) and provide a grounded, context-specific perspective from FCE Yola that should inform both college-level policy and future empirical research. While ChatGPT offers genuine pedagogical opportunities, its uncritical adoption risks hollowing out the formative writing, reasoning and reflection practices that are central to the professional identity of a teacher-in-training. 7.3 Recommendations 1. FCE Yola should develop and formally adopt a ChatGPT and generative-AI policy covering permissible use, citation requirements and assessment redesign. 2. Student-teachers should be formally inducted into critical AI literacy — including prompt evaluation, source verification, bias detection and ethical use — within the General Studies curriculum. 3. Lecturers should redesign high-stakes assessments to incorporate oral defences, in-class writing, and process-based evidence (drafts, bibliographies, viva voce) that are difficult to outsource to AI. 4. The college library should provide orientation on legitimate AI tools (e.g., reference managers with limited AI functions) as alternatives to ChatGPT for routine tasks. 5. Future research should adopt longitudinal and mixed-methods designs to track how AI adoption evolves across cohorts and to differentiate the impact of ChatGPT on learning outcomes by discipline and gender. 7.4 Limitations The use of a single institution and a relatively small purposive sample of 24 student-teachers means the findings are context-specific and should not be generalised across all Nigerian Colleges of Education without further replication. Self-report bias is also a possibility, as participants may under-report unethical usage of ChatGPT despite assurances of confidentiality. References Abdulmumin, I. A., & Abdulrahman, M. H. Undergraduate perception, attitude and utilization of artificial intelligence ChatGPT for learning: An educational technology perspective. Indonesian Journal of Multidisciplinary Research, 5, 175–186. https://doi.org/10.17509/ijomr.v5i1.82062 Ajani, H., & Ramaila, S. Generative AI vs future competencies of Nigerian public university students: A qualitative approach. Research Square. https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs- 8152885/v1 Ajani, O. A. Teachers' perspectives on professional development in South Africa and Nigeria: Towards an andragogical approach. Journal of Educational and Social Research, 11, 288. https://doi.org/10.36941/jesr-2021-0070 Alkhaqani, A. L. ChatGPT and nursing education: Challenges and opportunities. Al-Rafidain Journal of Medical Sciences, 4, 50–51. https://doi.org/10.54133/ajms.v4i.110 Apata, S. B., & Oyedele, O. M. Undergraduates' application of ChatGPT in academic writing: Perceptions, problems and prospects. International Journal of Social Sciences and Management Review, 8, 201–218. https://doi.org/10.37602/ijssmr.2025.8312 Arif, T. B., Munaf, U., & Haque, I. U. The future of medical education and research: Is ChatGPT a blessing or blight in disguise? Medical Education Online, 28, 2181052. https://doi.org/10.1080/10872981.2023.2181052 Baidoo-Anu, D., & Owusu Ansah, L. Education in the era of generative artificial intelligence: Understanding the potential benefits of ChatGPT in promoting teaching and learning. SSRN. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4337484 Bishop, L. A computer wrote this paper: What ChatGPT means for education, research and writing. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4338981 Chan, C. K. Y. A comprehensive AI policy education framework for university teaching and learning. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 20. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-023-00408-3 Crcek, N., & Patekar, J. Writing with AI: University students' use of ChatGPT. Journal of Language and Education, 9, 128–138. https://doi.org/10.17323/jle.2023.17379 Curtis, N., & ChatGPT. To ChatGPT or not to ChatGPT? The impact of artificial intelligence on academic publishing. The Pediatric Infectious Disease Journal, 42, 275. https://doi.org/10.1097/inf.0000000000003852 Escalante, J., Pack, A., & Barrett, A. (2023). AI-generated feedback on writing: insights into efficacy and ENL student preference. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 20(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-023-00425-2 Essel, H. B., Vlachopoulos, D., Tachie-Menson, A., Johnson, E. E., & Baah, P. K. The impact of a virtual teaching assistant (chatbot) on students' learning in Ghanaian higher education. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 19. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-022-00362-6 Eysenbach, G. The role of ChatGPT, generative language models and artificial intelligence in medical education: A conversation with ChatGPT and a call for papers. JMIR Medical Education, 9. https://doi.org/10.2196/46885 Farrokhnia, M., Banihashem, S. K., Noroozi, O., & Wals, A. E. J. A SWOT analysis of ChatGPT: Implications for educational practice and research. Educational Review, 76, 460–474. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2023.2195846 Gronkjaer, M., Curtis, T., de Crespigny, C., & Delmar, C. Analysing group interaction in focus group research: Impact on content and the role of the moderator. Qualitative Studies, 2, 14–30. https://doi.org/10.7146/qs.v2i1.4273 Jalil, S., Rafi, S., LaToza, T. D., Moran, K., & Lam, W. ChatGPT and software testing education: Promises & perils. arXiv preprint. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2302.03287 Kasneci, E., Sebler, K., Kuchemann, S., Bannert, M., Dementieva, D., Fischer, F., Gasser, U.,Groh, G., Günnemann, S., Hullermeier, E., Krusche, S., Kutyniok, G., Michaeli, T., Nerdel, C., Pfeffer, J., Poquet, O., Sailer, M., Schmidt, A., Seidel, T., Kasneci, G. ChatGPT for good? On opportunities and challenges of large language models for education. Learning and Individual Differences, 103, 102274.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2023.102274 Kigozi, E. Quality assurance practices applied in PTTCs: Listening to the student-teachers' voice through focus group discussion. Educational Process: International Journal, 9, 23–42. https://doi.org/10.22521/edupij.2020.91.2 Lucy, S., Emmideme, G. N., & Sylvester, A. Social studies student-teachers' preparation for effective use of teaching and learning materials: The case of northern Colleges of Education in Ghana. Open Journal of Social Sciences, 10, 379–395. https://doi.org/10.4236/jss.2022.106027 Mahapatra, S. (2024). Impact of ChatGPT on ESL students’ academic writing skills: a mixed methods intervention study. Smart Learning Environments, 11(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-024-00295-9 Ngo, T. T. A. The perception by university students of the use of ChatGPT in education. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 18, 4–19. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v18i17.39019 Obed, K., Anangisye, W. A. L., & Sanga, P. L. Academic integrity considerations of using ChatGPT in assessment activities among university student-teachers. Quality Assurance in Education, 33, 305–320. https://doi.org/10.1108/QAE-06-2024-0100 Odutayo, A. O., & Ramsaroop, S. Experiences of student-teachers: Implications for refined student-support. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 22, 87–103. https://doi.org/10.26803/ijlter.22.7.5 Pal, G. (2024). Impact of ChatGPT on Student Learning Outcomes. Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research). https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.19205840 Pesce, M. A., & Blanco, D. F. Perceptions of pre-service teachers on the use of ChatGPT during their training and the future implications for their future role in high schools: A research in progress. Research Square. https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-4542918/v1 Rabiev, H., Sadidan, I., & Nurhidayah, Nim. Exploring the use of ChatGPT in academic assignments: Frequency, benefits and perceptions among university students. IC- ITECHS, 5, 465–469. https://doi.org/10.32664/ic-itechs.v5i1.1669 Rudolph, J., Tan, S., & Tan, S. ChatGPT: Bullshit spewer or the end of traditional assessments in higher education? Journal of Applied Learning & Teaching, 6. https://doi.org/10.37074/jalt.2023.6.1.9 Stöhr, C., Ou, A. W., & Malmström, H. Perceptions and usage of AI chatbots among students in higher education across genders, academic levels and fields of study. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 7, 100259. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2024.100259 Sullivan, M., Kelly, A., & McLaughlan, P. ChatGPT in higher education: Considerations for academic integrity and student learning. Journal of Applied Learning & Teaching, 6. https://doi.org/10.37074/jalt.2023.6.1.17 Xia, Q., Weng, X., Ouyang, F., Lin, T., & Chiu, T. K. F. (2024). A scoping review on how generative artificial intelligence transforms assessment in higher education. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 21(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-024-00468-z Ya'u, M. S., & Mohammed, M. S. AI-assisted writing and academic literacy: Investigating the dual impact of language models on writing proficiency and ethical concerns in Nigerian higher education. International Journal of Education and Literacy Studies, 13, 593–604. https://doi.org/10.7575/aiac.ijels.v.13n.2p.593 Zhai, X. ChatGPT user experience: Implications for education. SSRN. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4312418