Authors : Marimille H. Bowles; Joy SB. Gaza

Volume/Issue : Volume 10 - 2025, Issue 6 - June

Google Scholar : https://tinyurl.com/yp838kza

DOI : https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/25jun939

Note : A published paper may take 4-5 working days from the publication date to appear in PlumX Metrics, Semantic Scholar, and ResearchGate.

Abstract : This study investigated Filipino elementary school teachers in Maryland who implemented AI-assisted instructional practices and examined parental perceptions of this technological approach in education. The research used a multi-case qualitative research design to study three Filipino teachers and three parents who explained how AI tools deliver personalized learning, improve student engagement, and streamline teacher workload. Teachers reported benefits such as individualized instruction, gamified learning features, and adaptive assessments offered by platforms like DreamBox and Lexia Core5. However, challenges such as insufficient professional training, ethical concerns regarding data privacy, and maintaining a balance between AI and traditional teaching methods were identified. Parents presented a variety of opinions: some praised AI's ability to customize learning and increase motivation, while others were concerned about over-reliance on technology, its suitability for special education, and its impact on foundational skill development. The research results confirmed that professional development for educators and parent-teacher collaboration are essential to fully utilize AI in education. Bronfenbrenner’s Ecological Systems Theory (EST) and the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) were employed to frame the research, emphasizing the interconnected roles of stakeholders in integrating AI. The study revealed that AI brings potential benefits yet demands careful deployment alongside moral protections for human-focused education. The study delivered practical suggestions, which included teacher and parent training sessions, transparent information sharing, and the creation of AI tools that accommodate different learning needs. These insights guide future practices, policies, and tools for culturally sensitive AI adoption in education.

Keywords : Artificial Intelligence (AI); AI-assisted Instruction; Personalized Learning; Parental Perspectives; Student Engagement.

References :

1. Holmes, W., Bialik, M., Fadel, C., & Center for Curriculum Redesign. (2019). Artificial intelligence in education: Promises and implications for teaching and learning. In Center for Curriculum Redesign [Book].
2. Hwang, G., Xie, H., Wah, B. W., & Gašević, D. (2020). Vision, challenges, roles and research issues of Artificial Intelligence in Education. Computers and Education Artificial Intelligence, 1; 100001.
3. Zhai, X., Chu, X., Chai, C. S., Jong, M. S. Y., Istenic, A., Spector, M., Liu, J., Yuan, J. & Li, Y. (2021). A review of artificial intelligence (AI) in education from 2010 to 2020. Complexity, 2021(1).
4. Luckin, R., Holmes, W., UCL Knowledge Lab, University College London, Griffiths, M., Forcier, L. B., Pearson, & Open Ideas at Pearson. (2016). Intelligence Unleashed: An argument for AI in education. In Open Ideas at Pearson. Pearson.
5. Tay, H. Y. (2024). AI feedback: Moving beyond the hype to integrating it into a coherent feedback pedagogy. Routledge Open Research, 3, 26.
6. Zawacki-Richter, O., Marín, V. I., Bond, M. & Gouverneur, F. (2019). Systematic review of research on artificial intelligence applications in higher education – where are the educators? International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 16(1).
7. Ertel, W. (2017). Introduction to artificial intelligence. In Undergraduate topics in computer science.
8. Chassignol, M., Khoroshavin, A., Klimova, A. & Bilyatdinova, A. (2018). Artificial intelligence trends in education: A narrative overview. Procedia Computer Science, 136; 16–24.
9. Selwyn, N. (2019). Should robots replace teachers? AI and the Future of Education, [1st ed.] Polity Press.
10. Otermans, P. C. J., Baines, S., Livingstone, C., Pereira, M. & Aditya, D. (2024). Chatting with the future: A comprehensive exploration of parents’ perspectives on conversational AI implementation in children’s education. International Journal of Technology in Education, 7(3); 573–586.
11. Feser, M. S. (2024). Parents' views on the use of AI-based chatbots such as ChatGPT in high school (STEM) education.  Journal of Baltic Science Education, 23(1); 4–8.
12. Neves,  M.  (2025).  "Hey  siri,  will  AI  change my kid's future?" what parents really think.  
13. Thompson, E. (2024). Parents express mixed views on AI in education, new norton survey reveals — EdTech Innovation Hub. EdTech Innovation Hub.  
14. Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3); 319.
15. Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development: Experiments by nature and design. Harvard University Press.
16. Alharbi, S. & Drew, S. (2014). Using the technology acceptance model in understanding academics' behavioural intention to use learning management systems. International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications, 5(1).
17. Epstein, J. L. (2018). School, family, and community partnerships. In Routledge eBooks.
18. Gonzales, M. (2020). The chronosystem. In Springer eBooks;123–136.
19. Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2017). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. Sage Publications, Incorporated.
20. Yin, R. K. (2018). Case study research and applications: Design and methods, [6th ed.]. Sage Publications.
21. Yin, R. K. (2014). Case study research: Design and methods, [5th ed.]. Sage Publications.
22. Palinkas, L. A., Horwitz, S. M., Green, C. A., Wisdom, J. P., Duan, N. & Hoagwood, K. (2013). Purposeful sampling for qualitative data collection and analysis in mixed method implementation research. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, 42(5); 533–544.
23. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2); 77-101.
24. Yin, R. K. (2017). Case study research and applications: Design and methods. SAGE Publications.
25. Bisht, R. (2024). What is Purposive Sampling? Methods, Techniques, and Examples Researcher. Life.
26. Etikan, I. (2016). Comparison of convenience sampling and purposive sampling. American Journal of Theoretical and Applied Statistics, 5(1); 1.