This study investigates how teacher-education undergraduates in Greece use, evaluate, and trust Artificial Intelligence (AI) in higher education, with particular attention to the gap between widespread adoption and limited epistemic trust. The topic is important because generative AI is rapidly entering universities, reshaping learning practices, academic integrity, and the legitimacy of knowledge, while learners often rely on systems whose outputs are not easily verifiable. The study focuses on future teachers because they are both current users of AI in higher education and likely future mediators of its use in school settings. Addressing this problem, the study contributes empirical evidence on how AI adoption relates to epistemic authority and institutional legitimacy within teacher education rather than across university students in general. A mixed-methods design was employed using a structured questionnaire completed by 363 teacher-education undergraduates from the University of Patras and the University of Ioannina in Greece; the sample was predominantly women (86.0%) and first-year students (92.6%). Quantitative responses were analyzed statistically, open-ended answers were examined thematically, and factor analysis was used to identify latent attitudinal dimensions. The findings indicate very high AI use in everyday life (92.6%) and study practices (81.3%), but only moderate trust: 1.4% reported complete trust and 12.1% generally trusted AI-generated answers. Six dimensions explained 61.73% of total variance, pointing to a layered attitudinal structure within this teacher-education population, consistent with an adoption–trust paradox and with the need for transparent, verifiable, human-supervised educational AI. The observed verification-based trust calibration may partly reflect an emerging pedagogical orientation toward source checking and responsibility for knowledge mediation, but given the strong concentration of first-year students, this should be interpreted as characteristic of early-stage teacher education rather than of university students more broadly.
Παναγόπουλος et al. (Fri,) studied this question.