FACTORS INFLUENCING PRESCHOOL TEACHERS' BEHAVIORAL INTENTIONS TO USE AI FOR SUPPORTING CHILDREN WITH SPEECH DELAYS: A STRUCTURAL EQUATION MODELING APPROACH
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18173/2354-1075.2025-0094Keywords:
artificial intelligence in education, preschool teacher behavioral intention, speech delay intervention, technology acceptance model (TAM), unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT), inclusive education supportAbstract
This study explores the factors influencing preschool teachers' behavioral intentions to use artificial intelligence (AI) to support children with speech delays. Grounded in the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) and the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT), the research analyzes factors such as performance expectancy, effort expectancy, social influence, facilitating conditions, attitude toward technology, and difficulty in adapting to new technology. To this end, 355 preschool teachers were surveyed. The findings reveal that social influence, effort expectancy, and concerns about losing direct interaction have the most significant impact on teachers' behavioral intentions. In contrast, performance expectancy does not have a significant effect on the intention to use AI. This study sheds light on the drivers and barriers to AI adoption in early childhood education, with implications for supporting children with speech delays.
Downloads
References
[1] Panjwani-Charania S & Zhai X, (2023). AI for students with learning disabilities: A systematic review. Education and Information Technologies. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-11875-9
[2] Dwivedi YK, et al, (2021). Setting the future of digital and social media marketing research: Perspectives and research propositions. International Journal of Information Management, 59, 102168. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2020.102168
[3] Venkatesh V, Thong JYL & Xu X, (2016). Unified theory of acceptance and use of technology: A synthesis and the road ahead. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 17(5), 328–376. https://doi.org/10.17705/1jais.00428
[4] Scherer R, Siddiq F & Tondeur J, (2019). The technology acceptance model (TAM): A meta-analytic structural equation modeling approach to explaining teachers’ adoption of digital technology in education. Computers & Education, 128, 13–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.09.009
[5] Pedro N, Subosa M, Rivas A & Valverde P, (2019). Artificial intelligence in education: Challenges and opportunities for sustainable development. UNESCO. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000366994
[6] Yang Y, Chen L, He W, Sun D & Salas-Pilco SZ, (2024). Artificial Intelligence for enhancing special education for K-12: A decade of trends, themes, and global insights (2013–2023). International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 1–49. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-024-00367-5
[7] Qayyum A, Sadiqi T & Abbas MA, (2024). Integrating Artificial Intelligence into Early Childhood Education Policy in Pakistan: Challenges, Opportunities, and Recommendations. Journal of Development and Social Sciences, 5(4), 416–431. https://doi.org/10.47205/jdss.2024(5-IV)36
[8] Davis FD, (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008
[9] Haidt J, (2024). The Anxious Generation: How the Great Rewiring of Childhood is Causing an Epidemic of Mental Illness. Penguin Press.
[10] Hammer CS, Morgan P, Farkas G, Hillemeier M, Bitetti D & Maczuga S, (2017). Late talkers: A population-based study of risk factors and school readiness consequences. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 60(3), 607–626. https://doi.org/10.1044/2016_JSLHR-L-15-0417
[11] Hair JF Jr, Matthews LM, Matthews RL & Sarstedt M, (2017). PLS-SEM or CB-SEM: updated guidelines on which method to use. International Journal of Multivariate Data Analysis, 1(2), 107–123. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJMDA.2017.087624
