Generative AI (GAI) chatbots such as ChatGPT, Copilot, Perplexity and so forth, are increasingly being used by student teachers (e.g. Helm & Hesse, 2024). With this type of GAI chatbots you can translate texts, get explanations, correct your writing (e.g. Rudolph et al., 2023), and develop your language skills (e.g. Ou et al., 2024). Although many have investigated student teachers’ perceptions and experiences of using the technology (e.g. Helm & Hesse, 2024; Kalniņa et al., 2024; Mustroph & Steinbock, 2024) very few - if any at all - have explored the topic focusing on student teachers who have immigrated as adults or in their late teens to the country where they now study to become teachers and who have the language of instruction as a second language (L2). For example, Helm & Hesse (2024) relate the topic to the students’ AI literacy, Kalniņa et al. (2024) to age, gender and level of study and Mustroph & Steinbock (2024) to whether the students can be classified as tech-savvy or not. But using generative AI chatbots is a language practice highly affected by which language you use. For example, ChatGPT works better when using English which it is mostly trained upon, and Latin script languages then other script languages (Bang et al., 2023). Thus, language specific studies are needed to better understand the understanding and usage of the technology in teacher education.

Simultaneously previous studies suggest that L2-speakers language competences regularly are misunderstood or unappreciated (e.g. Ortega, 2019; Shin & Sterzuk, 2019). Additionally, immigrant student teachers’ study situation is generally understudied. Bayati (2014) finds in one of very few Nordic studies that these students receive deficient language support and that they also face racism linked to language, circumstances which can both jeopardize these student teachers’ possibility to complete their education. Hence it is of special interest to examine GAI chatbots – a tool which is supposed to give language support (e.g. Rudolph et al., 2023) and support language development (e.g. Ou et al., 2024) – in teacher education from the perspectives of these student teachers, while at the same time developing the fields knowledge of these specific students’ study situation.

The aim of this paper is to explore the study situation of student teachers in Norway and Sweden who have immigrated as adults or in their late teens and have learned the language of instruction as a second language, and the role GAI chatbots play in their education. The research questions are as follows: How can the study situation of the student teachers in question be understood? What role does GAI chatbots play for the student teachers in question in relation to their education?

The theoretical framework consists of postcolonial theory (e.g. Ahmed, 2000) and raciolingusitc ideologies (Flores & Rosa, 2015).  The theorise help to understand the student teachers’ perspectives in relation to socially constructed power relations and language ideologies. Language practices are not conducted nor assessed in an objective, discourseless sphere (Flores & Rosa, 2015) and our educational system is developed within a postcolonial context where race plays a vital role (Essed, 1991).

The data construction has been conducted through semi structured individual interviews with 30 student teachers who belong to the group in question, and a thematic analysis (Braun & Clarke, 2017). Interviews are the chosen method because they allow the participants to describe their experiences and perceptions (Brinkmann, 2018). During the interviews with the student teachers’ their chat logs from using GAI chatbots were used as a basis for the conversation, in those cases where the participants had used the technology. The chat logs served as a memory aid for the participants. A thematic analysis was conducted to, based on the aim and theoretical framework, identify, analyse and present themes (patterns) that emerge in the material (Braun & Clarke, 2017). The analysis process was not linear but developed in a flexible process and began already during the transcription of the material. The material was then processed during several readings to codes, themes, and sub-themes in an alternating process.

The data construction is in progress and will be completed by the time for the presentation. Expressed vaguely and generally, the result is expected to show 1) recurrent themes in the participants study situation and 2) how and when they use GAI chatbots and what role the technology plays in their education. This paper contributes to the understanding of the study situation of adult and late teenage immigrant student teachers in Nordic teacher education and their GAI chatbots usage, as well as to the understanding of how teacher education can promote or hinder the proliferation of knowledge on GAI chatbots and democratic values in our globalized pluralistic world.

Ahmed, S. (2000). Strange Encounters: Embodied Others in Post-Coloniality. Routledge. Bang, Y., Cahyawijaya, S., Lee, N., Dai, W., Su, D., Wilie, B., Lovenia, H., Ji, Z., Yu, T., Chung, W., Do, Q. V., Xu, Y., & Fung, P. (2023). A Multitask, Multilingual, Multimodal Evaluation of ChatGPT on Reasoning, Hallucination, and Interactivity. arXiv (Cornell University). https://doi.org/10.48550/arxiv.2302.04023 Bayati, Z. (2014). ”den Andre” i lärarutbildningen - En studie om den rasifierade svenska studentens villkor i globaliseringens tid (Gothenburg Studies in Educational Sciences, 352) [Doctoral thesis, University of Gothenburg]. Gothenburg University Publications Electronic Archive. http://hdl.handle.net/2077/35328 Braun, V. & Clarke, V. (2017). Thematic analysis. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 12(3), p. 297-298. https://doi-org.ezproxy.ub.gu.se/10.1080/17439760.2016.1262613 Brinkmann, S. (2018). The Interview. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Ed.), The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research (p. 576-599). SAGE Publications. Essed, P. (1991). Understanding everyday racism: An interdisciplinary theory. Sage Publications. Flores, N., & Rosa, J. (2015). Undoing Appropriateness: Raciolinguistic Ideologies and Language Diversity in Education. Harvard Educational Review, 85(2), 149–171. https://doi.org/10.17763/0017-8055.85.2.149 Helm, G., & Hesse, F. (2024). Usage and beliefs of student teachers towards artificial intelligence in writing. Research in Subject-Matter Teaching and Learning (RISTAL), 7(1), 1-18. DOI: 10.2478/ristal-2024-0001 Kalniņa, D., Nīmante, D., & Baranova, S. (2024). Artificial intelligence for higher education: benefits and challenges for pre-service teachers. Frontiers in Education (Vol. 9,). https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2024.1501819 Mustroph, C., & Steinbock, J. (2024). ChatGPT in foreign language education-friend or foe? A quantitative study on pre-service teachers’ beliefs. Technology in Language Teaching & Learning, 6(1), 1-17. DOI: 10.29140/tltl.v6n1.1133 Ou, A. W., Stöhr, C., & Malmström, H. (2024). Academic communication with AI-powered language tools in higher education: From a post-humanist perspective. System, 121. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2024.103225 Rudolph, J., Tan. S. & Tan, S. (2023). ChatGPT: Bullshit spewer or the end of traditional assessments in higher education? Journal of Applied Learning & Teaching, 6(1). https://doi.org/10.37074/jalt.2023.6.1.9 Shin, H., & Sterzuk, A. (2019). Discourses, Practices, and Realities of Multilingualism in Higher Education. TESL Canada Journal, 36(1), 147–159. https://doi.org/10.18806/tesl.v36i1.1307