Exploring the Integration of ChatGPT in Catholic Religious Education and Character Development: Students’ Experience and Use Patterns
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.33394/jp.v13i2.19746Keywords:
AI in Education, Catholic Religious Education, Character Building, ChatGPT, Techno-pedagogyAbstract
This study aims to explore the integration of ChatGPT in Catholic Religious Education and Character Development, focusing on students’ learning experiences, usage patterns, levels of awareness, and reasons for adopting the tool as a learning support. A qualitative phenomenological approach was employed to capture students’ lived experiences in using generative artificial intelligence in learning activities. The participants consisted of six junior high school students from Grades VII, VIII, and IX who were purposively selected based on their experience using ChatGPT in academic contexts. Data were collected through in-depth interviews, classroom observations, documentation, supplementary questionnaires, and field notes. Data credibility was ensured through method and source triangulation, as well as member checking. The data were analyzed thematically through the stages of data reduction, data display, and conclusion drawing and verification. The findings indicate that students use ChatGPT to deepen their understanding of learning materials and to support the completion of academic tasks. Two main patterns of use emerged, namely reflective and pragmatic, which shape how students engage with the technology. The integration of ChatGPT appears to contribute more strongly to the development of integrity-related values than relational values, underscoring the importance of sustained pedagogical guidance from teachers. These findings suggest that the purposeful integration of generative artificial intelligence, supported by reflective educational guidance, can promote both academic understanding and character formation. This approach also offers a transferable framework for the responsible integration of AI in faith-based educational institutions.
References
Bawden, D. (2008). Origins and concepts of digital literacy. In C. Lankshear & M. Knobel (Eds.). Digital literacies: Concepts, policies and practices.
Bloom, B. S., Engelhart, M. D., Furst, E. J., Hill, W. H., & Krathwohl, D. R. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals. Longman.
Chocarro, R., Cortiñas, M., & Marcos-Matás, G. (2021). Teachers’ attitudes towards chatbots in education: a technology acceptance model approach considering the effect of social language, bot proactiveness, and users’ characteristics. Educational Studies, 49(2), 295–313. https://doi.org/10.1080/03055698.2020.1850426
Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. Macmillan.
Erikson, E. H. (1968). Identity: Youth and crisis. W. W. Norton & Company.
Floridi, L. (2014). The fourth revolution: How the infosphere is reshaping human reality. Oxford University Press.
Fowler, J. W. (1981). Stages of faith: The psychology of human development and the quest for meaning. Harper & Row.
Freire, P. (1972). Pedagogy of the Oppressed (M. B. Ramos, Trans.).
Freire, P. (1998). Pedagogy of freedom: Ethics, democracy, and civic courage. Rowman & Littlefield.
Gilligan, C. (1982). In a different voice: Psychological theory and women's development. Harvard University Press.
Groome, T. H. (2015). Will there be faith? A new vision for educating and growing disciples. HarperOne.
Harbiansyah, O. (2019). Pendekatan fenomenologi: Pengantar praktik penelitian kualitatif. Media Neliti.
Hauerwas, S. (2001). The Hauerwas reader (J. Berkman & M. Cartwright, Eds.). Duke University Press.
Hobbs, R. (2010). Digital and media literacy: A plan of action. Aspen Institute.
Holmes, W., Bialik, M., & Fadel, C. (2019). Artificial intelligence for education. Center for Curriculum Redesign.
Kasneci, E., Seßler, K., Küchemann, S., Bannert, M., Dementieva, D., Fischer, F., & Kasneci, G. (2023). 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
Kemdikbud. (2023). Laporan prestasi akademik siswa Indonesia. Kementerian Pendidikan, Kebudayaan, Riset, dan Teknologi.
Kohlberg, L. (1984). The psychology of moral development: The nature and validity of moral stages (Vol. 2). Harper & Row.
Lickona, T. (1991). Educating for character: How our schools can teach respect and responsibility. Bantam Books.
Lim, N. A., Chen, X., & Yang, S. J. (2023). ChatGPT in education: A systematic review. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2023.100167
Luckin, R., Holmes, W., Griffiths, M., & Forcier, L. B. (2016). Intelligence unleashed: An argument for AI in education. Pearson.
Lynch, J. (2019). Catholic education in the digital age. Routledge.
Mahsun. (2024). Trend of using ChatGPT in learning process and character education. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 23(6), 295–313. https://www.ijlter.org/index.php/ijlter/article/view/10107
Mezirow, J. (1991). Transformative dimensions of adult learning. Jossey-Bass.
Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldana, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook (3rd ed.). Sage Publications.
Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Echnological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record.
Narvaez, D. (2010). Moral complexity: The fatal attraction of truthiness and the importance of mature moral functioning. Perspectives on Psychological Science.
O'Connell Killen, P., & de Beurs, J. (1996). The liberative psychology of James W. Fowler. Chalice Press.
Pantan, F. (2023). ChatGPT dan artificial intelligence: Kekacauan atau kebangunan bagi pendidikan agama Kristen. Diegesis: Jurnal Teologi, 8(1), 111–124.
https://doi.org/10.46933/DGS.vol8i1108-120
Pollefeyt, D., & Bouwens, J. (2014). Identity in formation: A shared Christian praxis for contemporary Catholic education. Peeters.
Power, F. C., Higgins, A., & Kohlberg, L. (1989). Lawrence Kohlberg's approach to moral education. Columbia University Press.
Rest, J. R., Narvaez, D., Bebeau, M. J., & Thoma, S. J. (1991). Postconventional moral thinking: A neo-Kohlbergian approach. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Salkeld, B. (2024). ChatGPT: Not bad at Catholic academic integration.
Selwyn, N. (2019). Should robots replace teachers? AI and the future of education. Polity.
Siemens, G. (2005). Connectivism: A learning theory for the digital age. Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 2(1), 3–10. https://www.itdl.org/Journal/Jan_05/article01.htm
Stahl, B. C., Timmermans, J., & Mittelstadt, B. D. (2016). The ethics of computing: A survey of the computing-oriented literature. ACM Computing Surveys, 55, 1–38.
Suyanto, S. (2019). Fenomenologi sebagai metode dalam penelitian kualitatif. Jurnal Lakon: Kajian Budaya Dan Sastra, 8(2), 150–164.
Turkle, S. (2011). Alone together: Why we expect more from technology and less from each other. Basic Book.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
Zawacki-Richter, O., Marín, V. I., Bond, M., & Gouverneur, F. (2019). Systematic review of research on artificial intelligence applications in higher education. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 16. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-019-0171-0
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
Citation Check
License
Copyright (c) 2026 The Author(s)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
License and Publishing Agreement
In submitting the manuscript to the journal, the authors certify that:
- They are authorized by their co-authors to enter into these arrangements.
- The work described has not been formally published before, except in the form of an abstract or as part of a published lecture, review, thesis, or overlay journal.
- That it is not under consideration for publication elsewhere,
- That its publication has been approved by all the author(s) and by the responsible authorities tacitly or explicitly of the institutes where the work has been carried out.
- They secure the right to reproduce any material that has already been published or copyrighted elsewhere.
- They agree to the following license and publishing agreement.
Copyright
Authors who publish with Jurnal Paedagogy agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY-SA 4.0) that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.
Licensing for Data Publication
-
Open Data Commons Attribution License, http://www.opendatacommons.org/licenses/by/1.0/ (default)
