ICT - Sanchez Et Al March 26 1

Students’ Perception, Literacy, and Ethical Considerations in AI-Enhanced
Education
A Thesis Proposal
presented to the
Faculty of the Senior High School Department
CORELLA NATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL
In Partial Fulfilment
of the Requirements for
PRACTICAL RESEARCH II
Quantitative Research
SANCHEZ, SHEILO B.
BUHION, ROSA BEL B.
ANTIPALA, MARY JEAN C.
CORTEZ, ANGELU ABBY B.
ERANA, DELIO JR. C.
PAG-ONG, JOHN DWAYNE C.
Grade 12- TVL ICT
May 2024
ii
APPROVAL SHEET

Poblacion, Corella, Bohol
Senior High School Department
THESIS PROPOSAL
Researchers: SANCHEZ, SHEILO B.

BUHION, ROSA BEL B.
ERANA, DELIO JR. C.
Grade 12- TVL ICT
TITLE OF STUDY: STUDENTS’ PERCEPTION, LITERACY, AND

ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS IN AI-ENHANCED
EDUCATION
APPROVED: ALICE A. ANGOY, LPT Date,2020

Research Adviser
REVIEWED: ANGIE NICA C. GA-AS, LPT Date,2020

Chairman
KARINA L. PADAYHAG, LPT

Member Date,2020
ELLAGERE D. TUYAC, LPT

Member Date,2020
APPROVED: MA. TERESA M. DAQUIO, MA Date,2020

Research Teacher
EUTEMIO G. BILOY, MA Date,2020

Coordinator, Senior High School
NICETAS D. FUDOLIN, PhD, AFP

School Principal II
iii
TRANSMITTAL
The descriptive research attached hereto, “STUDENTS’ PERCEPTION,

LITERACY, AND ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS IN AI-ENHANCED
EDUCATION” prepared and submitted by, Sheilo B. Sanchez, Rosa Bel B.
Buhion, Mary Jean C. Antipala, Angelu Abby B. Cortez, Delio Jr. C. Erana, John
Dwayne C. Pag-Ong in partial fulfillment of the requirements for Practical
Research 2 has been examined and recommended for acceptance and approval
for oral examination.
ALICE A. ANGOY, LPT MA. TERESA M. DAQUIO, MA

Research Adviser Practical Research 2 Teacher
Date Date
Approved by the Thesis Committee at the oral examination conducted on

with a grade of .
THESIS COMMITTEE
ANGIE NICA C. GA-AS

Chairman
Date
KARINA L. PADAYHAG, LPT ELLAGERE D. TUYAC, LPT

Member Member
Date Date
Accepted and approved as partial fulfillment of the requirements for the

Senior High School Technical Vocational and Livelihood Track, specialized in
.
NICETAS D. FUDOLIN, PhD, AFP

School Principal II
Date
iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
APPROVAL SHEET................................................................................................................ii
TRANSMITTAL.......................................................................................................................iii
LIST OF TABLES....................................................................................................................v
LIST OF FIGURES..................................................................................................................v
CHAPTER I..................................................................................................................................1
THE PROBLEM AND ITS SCOPE.......................................................................................1
Background of the Study.................................................................................................1
Theoretical Background...................................................................................................2
Legal Bases.........................................................................................................................4
Review of Related Literature...........................................................................................6
Local Studies......................................................................................................................8
Schematic Diagram.........................................................................................................10
THE PROBLEM.....................................................................................................................11
Statement of the Problem..............................................................................................11
Statement of Null Hypothesis.......................................................................................12
Scope and Delimitation..................................................................................................12
Significance of the Study...............................................................................................13
OPERATIONAL DEFINITION OF TERMS........................................................................15
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY...........................................................................................17
Design.................................................................................................................................17
Environment......................................................................................................................17
Respondents.....................................................................................................................18
Research Instrument.......................................................................................................19
Data Gathering Procedure.............................................................................................20
Statistical Treatment.......................................................................................................21
T-test...................................................................................................................................22
REFERENCES CITED..........................................................................................................23
APPENDICES........................................................................................................................25
CURRICULUM VITAE..........................................................................................................36
v
LIST OF TABLES
No table of figures entries found.
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 Schematic Diagram of the Study Error! Bookmark not defined.

1
CHAPTER I
THE PROBLEM AND ITS SCOPE
Background of the Study
The field of computer science dedicated in creating intelligent systems that
can perform tasks that typically require human intelligence has experienced rapid
advancement. Artificial Intelligence has revolutionized the field of education,
enabling personalized data-driven, and adaptive learning experiences. However,
as AI integration in education gains momentum, it becomes essential to
investigate students' awareness, literacy, and utilization of AI technology and it’s
ethical considerations.
Al-powered tools and technologies can be used in different ways. For
example, They can help students and teacher's accomplish difficult tasks in a
shorter amount of time. Also personalized learning is one of the best potential
benefits of Al in education, as It can improve students experience and motivation
and help educators create lesson plans that align each students’ strengths and
weaknesses.
ChatGPT, an AI-powered conversational agent is a widely recognized AI
tool in educational settings. ChatGPT utilizes natural language processing and
deep learning to engage in text-based conversations, answer questions, and
provide informations.
Nilsone's (2023) study, entitled “The Impact of Artificial Intelligence
amongst Higher Education Students,” intitle research highlights that ChatGPT is

2
one of the most widely used AI tools for educational purposes. While many
students have reported positive or neutral experiences with AI-driven learning
outcomes, some believe AI can influence their skills and academic outcomes.
The impact of AI on future job prospects varies with some students foreseeing AI
replacing certain aspects of their future roles, particularly in fields like information
technology.
AI literacy, encompassing the literacy, skills, and ethical understanding
needed to use AI technologies effectively, is emerging as a fundamental skill in
the AI era. This extends beyond mere tool usage to include critical reflection on
AI's ethical and societal implications. Students' mastery of AI literacy shapes their
education and influences their future careers and potential roles as educators.
In this context, the study aims to provide a comprehensive understanding
of how Corella National High School students view and engage with AI in
education; focusing on their perception of AI's effectiveness and impact on their
learning experiences. The research will also explore students' literacy of AI and
their ethical considerations when using AI in education.
Theoretical Background
This study is about student’s perception, literacy, and ethical consideration
in AI enhanced education. It is anchored on the theories, legal bases, review of
related literature, and related studies.
The first theory is the Constructivism Theory. According to Jean Piaget
(1997), constructivism is a theory of knowledge which humans generate

3
knowledge and meaning from an interaction between their experiences and their
ideas. It is an interaction between one’s experiences and reflexes or behavior
patterns during infancy.
This theory provides personalized learning, interactive engagement, timely
feedback, and collaborative learning, all of which contribute to the theory’s core
idea that students actively construct their understanding.
Second theory is Self-determination Theory (SDT), developed by
Edward L. Deci and Richard M. Ryan; in 2012. It is an empirically derived theory
of human motivation and personality in social contexts that differentiates
motivation in terms of being autonomous and controlled. SDT is focused on
variables that promote learning autonomy, competence, and relatedness as well
as intrinsic motivation.
SDT provides learners with autonomy by allowing them to make choices
about their learning paths. It promotes competence by offering tailored feedback
and adaptive learning resources.
Last theory is the Cognitive Load Theory. According to John Sweller
(2011), cognitive load theory is an instructional theory based on a person’s
knowledge of human cognition. The theory has used aspect of human cognitive
architecture to generate experimental instructional effects. These effects are
demonstrated when novel instructional procedures are used in a randomized and
controlled experiment. Suppose the novel approach facilitates learning based on
test performance; a new effect may have been demonstrated as an outcome

4
generated by change knowledge of human cognition. The new instructional
procedure that follows from the effect become candidates for relevant
professional such as instructional designers and teachers.
The theory provides in optimizing content presentation, adapts to learner’s
need, minimizes cognitive load, and provides researchers and educators with
practical applications in AI-enhanced education.
The theories of Constructivism, Self-determination (SDT) and Cognitive
Load offer a comprehensive framework for improving students' learning
experiences in AI-enhanced education. These theories emphasize personalized
learning, autonomy, and optimized content presentation, all of which align with
the transformative potential of AI in education. By integrating these theories,
educators and researchers can develop ethical and effective AI-enhanced
educational strategies. They promote responsible advancements in the field and
ensuring a holistic understanding of students' perceptions, knowledge
acquisition, and ethical considerations.
Legal Bases
This study is supported by legal bases, which are as follows:
The Republic Act No. 10533 or known as the “Enhanced Basic Education
Act” in 2013. It aims to design a basic education curriculum that makes the
Filipino graduates locally and globally competitive. The law has also envisioned
for the immediate attainment of international benchmarks.

5
This Republic Act supports the study by offering a legal framework that
outlines the objectives, composition, and criteria of excellence for basic
education in the Philippines. This is a vital reference for assessing how AI-
enhanced education is incorporated into the national educational system and
how it affects students.
Furthermore, Republic Act No. 10173 known as “Data Privacy Act” in
2012. This was established to protect and to safeguard the individual personal
data in an information and communications systems within the government and
the private sector while keeping the fundamental human right to privacy of
communication.
This Republic Act supports the study by offering a legal framework that
strongly emphasizes protecting people’s personal information and privacy. It
guarantees the ethical and secure collection and processing of data, which is
essential for studying delicate subjects about AI in education. This assistance
fosters trust among the participants and aids in maintaining the study’s integrity.
Moreover Republic Act No. 10627, also known as the “Anti-Bullying Act”
(ABA) of 2013, was signed in law in 2013 by President Benigno Aquino III.
However, this law is limited and does not reflect the school system’s continuously
adaptive and ever-changing environment. This act deals with bullying-related
concerns in the context of education, including cyberbullying.
This Republic Act supports the study by fostering a secure and welcoming
learning environment and putting a focus on inclusive and ethical education.

6
These components are important because it’s fosters an environment that allows
for open communication and a through knowledge of students’ experience, which
is important when studying how students view and engage with AI-enhanced
education.
Review of Related Literature
This literature review explores various aspects of AI-enhanced education,
focusing on student’s perception, knowledge acquisition, and ethical
consideration. Educational institutions are increasingly using artificial intelligence
(AI) to enhance the learning experience, assuming students have internet access
to utilize AI for research and reference purposes.
AI technologies is providing more personalized learning to students, automation
of the majority of repetitive tasks, and better access to resourcess. AI techniques
are another element in the transformation process of how our systems tackle the
educational goals. However, the shortages in these practices can become
potential issues, such as less interaction with humans, privacy,algorithmic bias,
excess on technology and high implementation costs whose undesirable
outcome may lead to more inequality in society.The different types of AI that we
use are Bard AI a conversational AI chatbot that uses machine learning, natural
language processing, and generative AI to understand user prompts and provide
text responses .Bing AI an AI-powered system that can search the internet,
analyze data, and simplify complex information to produce answer that humans
can understand. Chat sonic a sophisticated machine learning model built on
natural networks. It can simulate human speech and interactivity.

7
ChatGPT a large language model-based chatbot that enables users to direct a
conversation towards a desired length, format, style, level of detail, and
language. Jasper AI an artificial intelligence system that offers advanced
language processing capabilities. Ask AI an advanced free AI search engine that
enables users to Ask AI question and receive Instant, Accurate, and Factual
answers without ever storing your data.
Artificial intelligence (AI) is revolutionizing many industries by performing
tasks that typically require human intelligence to solve. AI contributes to complex
scientific and engineering workflows through simulating, supplementing, or
augmenting human intelligence in an efficient and precise manner. Examples of
such tasks include fraud detection in banking, conversational bots used in
customer service, and precision diagnostics in health care. AI aims at
programming intelligence into machines by learning from experiences and
adapting to changes in the environment to simulate human decision making and
reasoning processes.
Zhai's 2021 study, titled "A Review of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in
Education from 2010 to 2020," presents a comprehensive analysis of the use of
AI in education, including its current state of integration, potential research
trends, and challenges faced by educators and researchers. One significant
advantage of AI in education is its ability to provide real-time feedback to
students, which can help them identify areas of weakness and improve their
understanding of subject matter. Additionally, AI can assist educators in

8
designing more effective curriculums that meet the individual needs of each
student.
The research of Zawacki-Richter (2019) study, tittled “Systematic Review
of Research on Artificial Intelligence Application in Higher Education,” shows that
AI in education, particularly in the form of Artificial Intelligence in Education
(AIED), is a rapidly evolving field. The study highlights the need for educators to
explore the potential biological advantages of AI and its meaningful impact on
teaching and learning in higher education.
Meng, Dhimolea and Ali (2022) provides valuable insight into how
students perceive AI as a tool that enhances their educational knowledge. The
study examines the evolving influence of AI on education and its future impact,
emphasizing the dynamic relationship between students and AI in the
educational domain. AI can provide personalized learning experiences for
students by adapting to their individual needs and learning styles, ultimately
improving student engagement and motivation, leading to better academic
outcomes.
The work of Devi, Boruah, Nirban, Nimavat and Bajaj (2023) examines
critical concerns related to the use of AI in education, such as data security,
discrimination, bias, transparency of AI decisions, and grading practices.
However, the study also highlights the potential of AI to support students with
disabilities and provide them with a more inclusive learning experience.

9
Barrett and Banson's (2019) research explores the increasing integration
of AI technology in higher education. The study provides examples of AI
applications in schools, such as chatbots that can assist students with
administrative tasks and AI-powered virtual tutors that can offer personalized
support to students. These tools can enhance the overall experience of students,
facilitate improved communication between faculty and students, and support
students throughout their educational journey.
Overall, these studies collectively contribute to a comprehensive
understanding of the dynamics surrounding students' perception, literacy
acquisition, and ethical considerations in the context of AI-enhanced education.
Local Studies
Estrellado and Miranda (2023) argue that the use of Artificial Intelligence
(AI) in the Philippine educational system has sparked a lot of scholarly debates.
Their paper discusses the academic concerns and challenges of AI in education
(AIED), the potential benefits for enhanced learning experiences and data-driven
decision-making, as well as the need for a strong technological infrastructure and
computing resources aligned with policy frameworks. This includes addressing
data privacy concerns, the digital divide, and the need for ongoing faculty training
and development (Estrellado & Miranda, 2023). The authors emphasize the
importance of collaborations between educators and policymakers to leverage AI
benefits while carefully addressing social and ethical implications.

10
Similarly, Melchor, Lomibao, and Parcutilo (2023) explore the integration
of AI in mathematics education for Generation Alpha students. They emphasize
that AI can offer personalized instruction, foster critical thinking skills, and
prepare students for the demands of the digital age. They discuss various
approaches such as robotics, gamification, AI-assisted teaching, and virtual
reality that can enhance learning experiences. However, the authors
acknowledge that integrating AI in mathematics education for Generation Alpha
students faces challenges such as infrastructure limitations, quality assurance,
social interaction, and data privacy. They highlight initiatives promoting AI in
education, the adoption of smart campus technologies, and collaboration
between government and universities in the Philippines. The authors aim to
assess the readiness of Philippine tertiary mathematics classrooms for AI
integration and explore approaches, challenges, and considerations (Melchor,
Lomibao, & Parcutilo, 2023).

Schematic Diagram
Theories Legal Bases
 Constructivism Theory,  Republic Act No. 10533

1997 of Jean Piaget known as the “Enhanced
 Self-Determination Basic Education Act of
Theory, 2012 of Edward 2013”
Deci and Richard Ryan  Republic Act No. 10173
 Cognitive Load Theory, known as the “Data Privacy
2011 of John Sweller Act of 2012”
 Republic Act No. 10627
known as the “Anti-Bullying
Act of 2013”
Corella National High School

Grade 11 and 12 Students
S. Y. 2023 - 2024
Respondents’ Profile
 Age
 Sex
 Grade Level
 Perception on AI-Enhanced Education
 Knowledge on Artificial Intelligence (AI)
 Ethical Considerations in using AI
Students’ Perception, Literacy, and Ethical Considerations in

AI-Enhanced Education
Recommendations
Figure 1 Schematic Diagram of the Study

12
THE PROBLEM
Statement of the Problem
The main purpose of the study is to measure and investigate the
Perception, Literacy, and Ethical Considerations in AI Enhanced Education
among Grade 11 and Grade 12 students of Corella National High School of the
school year 2023-2024. This study will provide a comprehensive understanding
of how these students view and engage with AI in education.
Specifically, the study seeks to answer the following questions:
1. What is the profile of the students in terms of:
1.1 Age;
1.2 Sex; and
1.3 Grade Level?
2. How do Grade 11 and Grade 12 students perceive AI in their education?
3. What AI chatbots do students’ use in Education?
4. What is the Grade 11 and 12 students’ Literacy level in the use of AI in
Education?
5. What are the ethical considerations do students have regarding the use of
AI in education?
6. Is there a difference between the Grade 11 and Grade 12 students’
perception of AI in education?
literacy level on AI enhanced Education?

13
8. Is there a difference between the Grade 11 and Grade 12 students’ ethical
considerations of AI in education?
9. Based on the findings, what intervention program or recommendation can
be made?
Statement of Null Hypothesis
This study hypothesizes that:
Ho1: There is no difference between the Grade 11 and Grade 12 students’
perception of AI in education.
literacy level on AI enhanced Education.
ethical considerations of AI in education.
Scope and Delimitation
This study will measure and investigate the perception, literacy, and ethical
consideration in AI Enhanced Education among of Corella National High School
of the school year 2023-2024.
This study will cover their perception and literacy specifically on the use of
AI chatbots such as ChatGPT, BingAI, Chatsonic, Jasper AI, and Bard AI, and
Ask AI. Because each of these AI chatbots provides unique insights and
capabilities, making them valuable subject for study across various aspects of
artificial intelligence.
14
The study aims to determine the ethical considerations of SHS students
regarding the use of AI and develop possible intervention program or
recommendation. Data will be collected via surveys from SHS students during
the school year 2023-2024 at Corella National High School.
It’s crucial to note that the investigation is limited to the specified school
year. Consequent, the findings are context specific and should not be
generalized beyond this scope. The anticipated results will offer comprehensive
understanding of students’ perception, knowledge, and ethical consideration in AI
enhanced education.
Significance of the Study
This study explores the impact of AI technologies on education and it’s
relationship with high school students. It also examines ethical considerations
associated with their use. The aim is to understand how students engage with AI
technologies in education, including their perceptions, attitudes, convictions, and
motivations. This understanding will clarify how AI can enhance education and
address ethical concerns.
Specifically, this study benefits the following group or individuals:
Educators. The findings of this study can help educators understand how
students perceive and interact with AI-enhanced education. This can enable
them to design better learning experiences that are more engaging and effective.
15
Policymakers. This study benefit policymakers by equipping them to
enhance AI literacy strategies, considering students’ perspectives. Policymakers
can create environments that will allow students to be ready about the future
where AI plays a very crucial role.
Technology Developers. This study could technology developers make
an accountable technology by integrating ethical principles into a design, to build
transparency and trust. This statement ensures that AI tools are align with ethical
standards and enhancing the effectiveness in educational settings.
Students. Students themselves can benefit from the findings of this study
by understanding the ethical considerations and concerns around AI-enhanced
education. Also, students can be better equipped to navigate and use AI-
powered educational tools and resources in an effective and responsible manner.
Future Researchers. This study could benefit the future researchers
because it can give guidelines about their study. The outcome of this study could
contribute as to a guide for responsible AI use, which would inform educators,
policymakers, and technology developers.

16
OPERATIONAL DEFINITION OF TERMS
The terms used in this study were defined to place the researchers and the
readers in the same frame of reference.
Age. The time elapsed from an individual’s date of birth to the date of data
collection.
Artificial Intelligence. The science of developing machines that can think
like humans.
Ask AI. An advanced free AI search engine that enables users to Ask AI
question and receive Instant, Accurate, and Factual answers without ever storing
your data.
Bard AI. A conversational AI chatbot that uses machine learning, natural
language processing, and generative AI to understand user prompts and provide
text responses.
Bing AI. An AI-powered system that can search the internet, analyze data,
and simplify complex information to produce answer that humans can
understand.
Chat sonic. A sophisticated machine learning model built on natural
networks. It can simulate human speech and interactivity.
ChatGPT. A large language model-based chatbot that enables users to
direct a conversation towards a desired length, format, style, level of detail, and
language.
17
Ethical Considerations. Deliberations on moral principles and values that
guide students in making ethical decisions, particularly in academic and research
settings.
Grade level. A classification indicating the educational stage or level of
proficiency attained by a student, typically based on their academic performance
and completion of curriculum requirements.
Jasper AI. An artificial intelligence system that offers advanced language
processing capabilities.
Literacy. The ability to read, write, and comprehend written language,
enabling individuals to effectively communicate, gather information, and
participate in society.
Perception. The opinions and ideas that students have about AI-
enhanced education.
Sex. The biological characteristics that determine whether an individual is
male or female.
18
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Design
This study is a quantitative in nature because the researchers looked for a
numerical data response. In particular, this study is based on descriptive.
Descriptive research provides a detailed and comprehensive analysis of a
phenomenon, group, or situation without manipulating variables.
Environment
The locale of the study is at Corella National High School. It is a DepEd
manage multi-grade public secondary school located at Poblacion, Corella,
Bohol. It is half kilometer away from the municipal hall of Corella.
Figure 2 Location of the study

19
Respondents
The target population of the study are the Grade 11 & Grade 12
students of the school year 2023 – 2024. They will provide a comprehensive
understanding of how they engage using (AI) Artificial Intelligence in their
education. These students belong to seven strands namely: STEM, ABM,
HUMMS A, B, Tourism, Cookery, SMAW, and ICT.
With a population size of 472, the research considered a sample of 83
respondents determined using Slovin’s with a ten percent 10% margin of error.
To avoid biases, the sample were randomly selected through Stratified Random
Sampling, a type of probability sampling which a research organization can
branch off the entire population into multiple non-overlapping, homogeneous
groups (strata) and randomly chose final members from the various strata for
research which reduces cost and improves efficiency.
Slovin’s Formula: Stratified Random Sampling:
N=N1+N (e)2 nℎ=NℎN n
Where: Where:
N = total of sample nh = sample size using proportionate
N = total of population stratified random sampling
E = margin of error Nh = total stratum population
N = Total population
n = sample size
20
GRADE 11 STRANDS POPULATION SAMPLE

STEM 31 5
ICT 15 3
ABM 14 2
HUMMS A 45 8
HUMMS B 46 8
SMAW 35 6
Tourism 14 2
Cookery 30 5
GRADE 12 STRANDS
STEM 29 5
ICT 23 4
ABM 14 2
HUMMS A 39 8
HUMMS B 41 8
SMAW 28 5
Tourism 25 4
Cookery 43 8
N=472 N=83
Research Instrument
To achieve the objectives of this study, the researchers will use a face-to-
face method for a self-made survey structured questionnaire, which will be
divided into four parts. The first part will gather the profile of the respondents.
The second part will gather information on how students perceive AI in
education, using a 4-point Likert Scale (Strongly Disagree-1, disagree-2, Agree-
3, Strongly Agree-4). The third part will test the students' literacy level on the use
of AI, using a True or False format. Finally, the fourth part will gather information
on ethical considerations that students have regarding the use of AI, using a 4-
point Likert Scale (Strongly Not Consider-1, Not Consider-2, Consider-3, Strongly
Consider-4). Before the distribution of the questionnaire to the respondents, the
self-made questionnaire will be pilot tested to ensure reliability and validity. Since
21
the target population of this study is SHS students, selected Grade 11 & Grade
12 student will be part of the pilot testing. After the pilot testing, the researchers
will revise or improve the self-made questionnaire accordingly. Once the
questionnaire is finalized, the researchers will proceed to distribute it to the
respondents.
Data Gathering Procedure
Prior to the conduct of this study, the researcher will go through the formal
process of securing permission from authorities to allow the conduct of the study
using the different documents available in the school.
Upon approval, the study will be started. The questionnaires will be
administered personally by the researchers to the target respondents and will be
given enough time to accomplish and answer the forms before it will be retrieved.
The responses will be tallied and collated in pertinent tables for the purpose of
analysis, interpretation and will be statistically treated to test the hypothesis.
The findings will serve as bases for conclusion and recommendations.
Statistical Treatment
After the questionnaires were answered and retrieved, the data were collated,
tabulated, and interpreted using the following statistical tools:
1. Percentage. It is used to determine the profile of the respondents and the
frequency of their answer on the listed items in the questionnaire.

22
2. Weighted mean and Composite mean. It is used to gauge the average
value of responses to the different items in the questionnaire. The
following interpretation is used.
Perception on AI-Enhance Education
Numerical Range Descriptive Rating Interpretation

Strongly Disagree (1) Very Negative
1.0-1.74
Perception
1.75-2.49 Disagree (2) Negative Perception
2.50-3.25 Agree (3) Positive Perception
Strongly Agree (4) Very Positive

3.25-4.00
Perception
Literacy on Artificial Intelligence (AI) Enhanced Education
Score Interpretation
12-15 Highly literate
8-11 Literate
4-7 illiterate
0-3 Very iIliterate
Ethical Considerations in AI in Education
Descriptive
Numerical Range
Rating/Interpretation
Strongly Do not
1.0-1.74 Consider (1)
1.75-2.49 Do not Consider (2)

23
2.50-3.25 Consider (3)
3.25-4.00 Strongly Consider (4)
3. T-test. A T-test is a statistical tool that checks if there is a significant
difference between the means of two groups. It considers sample data,
including means and standard deviations, producing a t-value for
comparison with critical values or p-values to assess statistical
significance. This test is often employed in hypothesis testing with small
sample sizes, assuming normal distribution.

24
CHAPTER II
PRESENTRATION, ANALYSIS, AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA
To accomplish the purpose of this study, a survey was conducted among
Grade 11 & Grade 12 students of Corella National High School. In this chapter,
the data gathered through a questionnaire as a research tool were presented,
analyzed, and interpreted regarding the degree of students’ perception, literacy,
and ethical consideration in AI enhanced education.
Profile of the respondents
The data on the profile of the respondents are categorized according to
age, sex, grade level, as shown in Table 1.
Age. In Terms of age, constituting 50.60% (42 individuals), are aged 17,
followed by 20.48% (17 individuals) each for ages 16 and 18. Furthermore,
7.23% (6 individuals) are aged 19, while only 1.20% (1 individual) are aged 20,
collectively accounting for the entire sample of 83 respondents.
Sex. On the same table, it was revealed that there were 31 (37.35%)
males and 52 (62.65%) females.
Grade Level. There are (46.99%) of the total respondents are in Grade
11, constituting 39 individuals, while (53.01%) are in Grade 12, comprising 44
individuals out of the total of 83.

25
Profile of the Respondents
This refers to the respondents’ profiles such as age, grade level, and sex.
Table 1
Age of the Respondents
Age F %
16 17 20.48
17 42 50.60
18 17 20.48
19 6 7.23
20 1 1.20
Total 83 100.00
Mean Age 17.18
Table 1 shows the age of the respondents. Forty-two (50.60%) out of 83
respondents are 17 years old. Seventeen (20.48%) respondents are 16 and 18
years old, respectively. Six (7.23%) are 19 years old, while only one (1.20%) is
20 years old.
The mean age of the respondents. Forty-two (50.60%) out of 83
respondents are 17 years old. Seventeen (20.48%) respondents are 16 and 18
years old, respectively. Six (7.23%) are 19 years old, while only one (1.20%) is
20 years old.
The mean age of the respondents is 17.18 years old .it implies that most of
the Respondents are considered adolescent and are capable enough to respond
to the research instrument of the study.

26
Table 2
Gender of the respondents
Sex F % Rank
Male 31 37.35 2
Female 52 62.65 1
Total 83 100.00
The table shows the gender of the respondents. Fifty-two (62.65%) out of
83 respondents are female. Thirty-one (37.35%) respondents are male.
Table 3
Grade level of the respondents
Grade Level F % Rank
11 39 46.99 2
12 44 53.01 1
Total 83 100.00
The table shows the grade level of the respondents. Forty-four (53.01%)
out of 83 respondents are grade 12 thirty-nine (46-99%) respondents are in
grade 11.
27
Table 4
AI usage by students
Types of AI used by
students F % Rank
BARD (1) 1 1.08 4
Bing (2) 0 0.00 5
Chat Sonic (3) 1 1.08 4
ChatGPT (4) 60 64.52 1
Jasper AI (5) 2 2.15 3
Ask AI (6) 29 31.18 2
Total 93 100
Table 4 shows AI usage by students. Sixty (64.52) out of 93 students used
Chat GPT. Twenty-nine (31.18%) student s used Ask AI. Two (2.15%) are using
Jasper AI. One (1.08%) is using Bard AI, using Chat Sonic, while none (0.00%)
are using Bing AI.
Table 5
28
Perception of the respondents
Weighted Descriptive Ran

Perception Mean Rating Interpretation k
Positive
1 3.02 Agree Perception 1
Positive
Positive
Positive
Positive
Positive
Positive
Positive
Positive
Negative
10 2.43 Disagree Perception 9
Composite Positive
Mean 2.70 Agree Perception
Table 5 shows the perception of the respondents. (3.02) weighted has an
(Agree) descriptive rating and has interpretation of positive Perception.(2.78)
weighted mean has an (Agree) descriptive rating and has an interpretation of
(positive perception). (2.76) weighted mean has an (Agree) descriptive rating and
has an interpretation of (positive perception). (2.75) weighted mean has an
(Agree) description meaning and has (Agree) description the rating and has an
interpretation of (positive perception). (2.69) weighted mean has an (Agree)
descriptive rating and has an (Agree) descriptive rating and has an interpretation
29
of (positive perception). (2.61) weighted mean has an (Agree) descriptive rating
and has an interpretation of (positive perception). Both (2.59) weighted has an
(Agree) descriptive rating and has interpretation of (positive perception). While
(2.43) weighted mean has an (Agree) descriptive rating and has an interpretation
of (Negative perception).
Numerical Descriptive
Interpretation
Range Rating
Strongly
1.0-1.74 Very Negative Perception
Disagree (1)
1.75-2.49 Disagree (2) Negative Perception

2.50-3.25 Agree (3) Positive Perception
Strongly Agree
3.25-4.00 Very Positive Perception
(4)
In accordance with this table with a scale range from 1.0-1.74, participants
who strongly disagree about given statement can be found. When speaking
about participants with a score of 1.75-249, this indicates only Negative
perception. These particular numbers correspond to the participants who had
perceptions that either showed an “agree” or “disagree” perspective. The range
containing such results as at least 3.25-4.00 is therefore stand for “strongly
agree” and show an optimistic mindset in general.

30
Table 6
Score of the respondents
Score F % Interpretation Rank
12-15. 11 13.25 Highly literate 3
8-11. 48 57.83 Literate 1
4-7. 23 27.71 Illiterate 2
0-3 1 1.20 Very illiterate 4
Table 6 shows the score of the respondents. 48 (57.83%) individuals are labeled
as “Literate” are suggesting a satisfactory level of literacy skills. Following this 23
individuals (27.71%) of the population fall within the 4-7 score range, classified
as “Illiterate” conversely 11 individuals (13.25%)of the population achieve scores
between 12-15,indicating a higher level of literacy termed as “Highly Literate”.
Lastly only 1 individual (1.20%) of the population falls within the 0-3 score range,
categorized as “Very illiterate”.
Table 7
31
Reveals the Ethical Considerations of AI in Education
Weighted Descriptive
Statements Mean Rating Rank
1 2.59 Consider 10
2 2.75 Consider 7
3 2.83 Consider 5
4 2.64 Consider 9
5 2.86 Consider 4
6 2.92 Consider 2
7 2.88 Consider 3
8 2.72 Consider 8
9 3.10 Consider 1
10 2.80 Consider 6
Composite Mean 2.81 Consider
As presented in Table 5, the respondents gave ethical consideration in AI in
education, with a composite mean of 2.81. This means that they consider the AI
in their Education.
Statement 9, Seeking information about how AI systems work, their benefits and
potential risks before using it, ranked 1st with a weighted mean of 3.10 interpreted as
consider. It followed by statement 6, Possible AI limitations and risks, with a weighted
mean of 2.92 interpreted as consider. Statement 7, Reporting errors, biases or usability
issues for better outcomes for all users. with a weighted mean of 2.88 interpreted as
consider. Statement 5, My right to know how decisions are made and what factors
influence AI recommendations, with a weighted mean of 2.86 interpreted or consider.
Statement 3, Developing digital literacy skills to evaluate AI-generated content critically,

32
with a weighted mean of 2. 83 interpreted or consider. Statement 10, Sharing my
personal information and privacy rights are respected, with a weighted mean of 2.81
interpreted as consider. Statement 2, Approach AI with a critical mindset, especially in
verifying facts., with a weighted mean of 2.75 interpreted as consider. Statement 8,
Seeking clarifications for incorrect information or biased information from AI-generated
content, with a weighted mean of 2,72 interpreted as consider. Statement 4, Integrity
and academic identity in using AI, with a weighted mean of 2.64 interpreted as consider.
Last is statement 1, AI-generated content for any unfair or biased outcomes, with a
weighted mean of 2.59 interpreted as moderately important.
Descriptive
Numerical Range
Rating/Interpretation
Strongly Do not
1.0-1.74
Consider (1)
1.75-2.49 Do not Consider (2)
2.50-3.25 Consider (3)
3.25-4.00 Strongly Consider (4)
According to this table, values ranging from 1.0 - 1.74 are stromgly not
considered, those between 1.75 - 2.49 are not considered, values between 2.50 -
3.25 are considered, and those falling between 3.25 - 4.00 are strongly.
33
Table 8
Difference between the Grade 11 and 12 Students' Perception on the Use
of AI in Education
Grade 11 Grade 12
Mean 2.651282051 2.734090909
Variance 0.19414305 0.162299154
Observations 39 44
Hypothesized Mean Difference 0
df 78
t Stat -0.889510982
P(T<=t) one-tail 0.188231872
t Critical one-tail 1.664624645
P(T<=t) two-tail 0.376463745
t Critical two-tail 1.990847069
The table presents statistical findings comparing the perceptions of Grade
11 and Grade 12 students regarding the use of AI in education. On average,
Grade 12 students show a slightly more positive perception, as indicated by their
higher mean score of 2.734 compared to Grade 11's 2.651. Variance suggests
that Grade 12 students' perceptions are slightly less dispersed around the mean
compared to Grade 11 students. However, the calculated t-statistic of
approximately -0.89 falls below the critical t-values for both one-tailed and two-
tailed tests, indicating a lack of statistical significance in the difference between

34
the two groups' perceptions. Thus, there is insufficient evidence to conclude that
there is a significant difference in perception between Grade 11 and Grade 12
students regarding AI in education.
Table 9
Difference between the Grade 11 and 12 Students' AI Literacy
Grade 11 Grade 12
Mean 8.692307692 9.113636364
Variance 7.744939271 3.823995772
Observations 39 44
df 67
t Stat -0.788533414
P(T<=t) one-tail 0.216583011
P(T<=t) two-tail 0.433166023
The table illustrates a statistical comparison of AI literacy levels between
Grade 11 and Grade 12 students. It shows that Grade 12 students have a slightly
higher mean AI literacy score (2.734) compared to Grade 11 students (2.651),
indicating a marginally better proficiency among the older students. Additionally,

35
the variance in AI literacy scores is slightly lower for Grade 12 students (0.162)
than for Grade 11 students (0.194), suggesting that Grade 12 students' scores
are somewhat less dispersed around the mean. However, the calculated t-
statistic of approximately -0.89 falls below the critical t-values for both one-tailed
and two-tailed tests, implying that there is no statistically significant difference in
AI literacy between the two groups. Thus, based on the provided data, it cannot
be concluded that there is a meaningful discrepancy in AI literacy levels between
Grade 11 and Grade 12 students.
Table 10
Difference between the Grade 11 and 12 Ethical Considerations in AI
Grade 11 Grade 12
Mean 2.841025641 2.777272727
Variance 0.212483131 0.155750529
Observations 39 44
df 75
t Stat 0.672460551
P(T<=t) one-tail 0.251678542
P(T<=t) two-tail 0.503357084

36
The provided table compares the ethical considerations in AI between
Grade 11 and Grade 12 students, revealing nuanced differences in their
perceptions. Grade 12 students exhibit a slightly higher mean score for ethical
considerations (2.734) compared to Grade 11 students (2.651), indicating a
potentially more developed understanding or awareness of ethical issues
surrounding AI among the older cohort. Additionally, the variance in ethical
considerations scores is lower for Grade 12 students (0.162) than for Grade 11
students (0.194), suggesting a more consistent viewpoint across the Grade 12
group. However, the calculated t-statistic of approximately -0.89 falls below both
the critical one-tail value (1.665) and the critical two-tail value (1.996), indicating
a lack of statistical significance in the observed difference between the two
groups. Consequently, based on the provided data, it cannot be conclusively
stated that there is a significant discrepancy in ethical considerations related to
AI between Grade 11 and Grade 12 students.

37
Table 11
Summary of the Differences
t-test t Critical two-

Variable item value tail Decision
Grade Accept Null

Level Perception -0.89 1.99 Hypothesis
Accept Null
Literacy -0.79 2.00 Hypothesis
Ethical Accept Null

Considerations 0.67 1.99 Hypothesis
Table 11 shows that there is no significant difference between the Grade 11
and Grade 12 students' perception of AI in Education. This is supported by the
computed t-test value is -0.89 which is less than the t-critical value of 1.99. Thus,
the null hypothesis is accepted. This means that Grade 11 and Grade 12 do not
differ in their perception of AI in education.

38
CHAPTER III
SUMMARY, FINDING, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS
This chapter summaries the findings of the study, gives the conclusions
drawn from the findings and presents the recommendations based on the results
relevant to the study. Likewise, this study might serve as useful tool for future
researchers whose field of concentration is similar in nature.
SUMMARY
Statement of the Problem. The main purpose of the study is to measure
and investigate the Perception, Literacy, and Ethical Considerations in AI
Enhanced Education among Grade 11 and Grade 12 students of Corella National
High School of the school year 2023-2024. This study will provide a
comprehensive understanding of how these students view and engage with AI in
education. Specifically, the study seeks to answer the following questions:
1. What is the profile of the students in terms of:
9.1 Age;
9.2 Sex; and
9.3 Grade Level?
2. How do Grade 11 and Grade 12 students perceive AI in their education?
3. What AI chatbots do students’ use in Education?
4. What is the Grade 11 and 12 students’ Literacy level in the use of AI in
Education?
5. What are the ethical considerations do students have regarding the use of
39
AI in education?
perception of AI in education?
7. Is there a difference between the Grade 11 and Grade 12 students’ literacy
level on AI enhanced Education?
8. Is there a difference between the Grade 11 and Grade 12 students’ ethical
considerations of AI in education?
9. Based on the findings, what intervention program or recommendation can
be made?
Null Hypothesis. This study hypothesizes that: 1) There is no difference
between the Grade 11 and Grade 12 students’ perception of AI in education. 2)
There is no difference between the Grade 11 and Grade 12 students’ literacy
level on AI enhanced Education. 3) There is no difference between the Grade 11
and Grade 12 students’ ethical considerations of AI in education.
Research Methodology. This study utilized quantitative research design
with the aid of a questionnaire. The self-made survey questionnaire was divided
into four parts: 1) profile of the respondents 2) gather information on how
students perceive AI in education, using a 4-point Likert Scale. 3) test the
students' literacy level on the use of AI, using a True or False format. 4) gather
information on ethical considerations that students have regarding the use of AI,
using a 4-point Likert Scale. The sample was obtained from the Grade 11 and 12
students and was conducted at Corella National High School in Poblacion,
Corella, Bohol.
40
FINDINGS
The following findings were based on the results of the follows:
Profile of the Respondents.
Age. Most of the Grade 11 and 12 students were within the age bracket of
17 years old.
Sex. The respondents of this study were mostly females.
Grade Level. Most of the respondents are Grade 12 students.
Al usage by students. Almost all of the respondents used ChatGPT and
only few used Ask Al, Jasper AI, Chat Sonic, Bard Al and none for Bing AI.
Perception of the respondents. AI - generated content for any unfair or
biased outcomes, ranked first. It is followed by the statement possible AI
limitation and risk. The statement reporting error, biases or usability issues for
better outcomes for AI users, comes third. Fourth is the statement, developing
digital literacy skills to evaluate AI-generated content critically. Fifth is the
statement, seeking information about how AI system work, their benefits and
potential risk before using it. It is followed by the statement, My right to know how
decisions are made and what factors influence AI recommendations. Seventh is
the statement, seeking clarification for incorrect information or biases information
from AI-generated content. It is followed by the statement, approach AI with a
mindset, specially in verifying fact and statement, integrity and academic identity
41
in using AI. Ninth is the statement, sharing my personal information and privacy
right are respected.
The scores of the respondents. The individual scoring between 8-11 hold
the highest rank, being categorized as ‘’literature’’ following them, individuals with
scores ranging from 4-7 rank scored and are labeled as ‘’illiterate’’. Lastly
individual scoring between 0-3 hold the lowest rank being categorized as very
‘’illiterate’’.
The ethical consideration of AI in education. The table describes the
ethical factors about AI in education, and a combined mean of 2.81 says that AI
is considered by people. The issues which gained highest level of support were
the AI systems seeking of information, the acknowledgement of AI limitations and
risk, errors and bias reporting, and understanding of how AI decisions are made.
The statements usually belong to the range 2.50 to 3.25. Besides, the statements
whose values are less than 2.50 are not considered.
Difference between the Grade 11 and 12 Students' Perception on the
Use of AI in Education. The comparison of 11th graders and 12th graders
thoughts on AI application in education made it obvious that 12th years were
more positive (2.734 for 12th graders is higher than 2.651 for 11th graders in this
regard). Between the standard deviation(s) around the mean of both groups
there have slightly less variation. The t-statistic of approximately -0.89 however
was not large enough to find a significant difference between the two groups'
perception. As a result, this study did not discover any huge differences among
how the teens of Grade 11 and Grade 12 see AI in education.

42
Difference between the Grade 11 and 12 Students' AI Literacy. The
table shows the AI literacy of (Grade 11 and Grade 12 students). The variance of
scores for Grade 12 students is slightly lower whereas the mean AI literacy score
is very close to that of Grade 11 students. Although, the t-test reveals a non-
statistics difference in AI literacy between the two groups, the finding suggests
that there is no meaningful difference based in data.
Difference between the Grade 11 and 12 Ethical Considerations in AI.
The table represents ethical issues in AI for Grade 11 and Grade 12 students.
The means of Grade 12 students (2.734) are higher than that of Grade 11
students (1.944), and their variances (0.162) are lower, showing that potentially
there is more awareness among Grade 12 students and the viewpoints tend to
be more consistent. On the contrary, the t-statistic (-0.89) which is not statistically
significant shows that there is no clear differentiation between the ethical
considerations that the two groups have concerning AI.
Summary of the Differences. As shown in Table 9, there is no significant
difference in the views of AI in education between the Grade 11 and the Grade
12 students. The test statistic of -0.89, less than the critical value of 1.96
indicates the rejection of the null hypothesis. Mainly, grade 11 students and
grade 12 students tend to think alike in regards to the AI in education.

43
CONCLUSION
The following conclusions were drawn: The perception results led to
accepting the null hypothesis. Additionally, the literacy results also supported
accepting the null hypothesis. Furthermore, the ethical considerations also
supported accepting the null hypothesis.
The study focused on measuring and investigating the Perception, Literacy,
and Ethical Considerations in AI-Enhanced Education among Grade 11 and
Grade 12 students of Corella National High School. The findings revealed
insights into students' profiles, AI chatbot usage, literacy levels, and ethical
considerations related to AI in education. The study did not find a significant
difference in perception between Grade 11 and Grade 12 students regarding AI
in education. Overall, the research provides valuable information for educators,
policymakers, technology developers, and future researchers to enhance AI
literacy and consider students' perspectives for designing effective educational
strategies.
RECOMMENDATIONS
a) AI Literacy Programs. Innovate and install both AI primary and high school
literacy program which should have received grades in eleventh and
twelfth. As such, it is warranted that it should inform why the AI programs
should be the curriculum only so to diversify the students' intellectual
capacity to comprehend AI, its abilities, limitations and ethical concerns. It
would be appropriate to arouse the interest of students and make them

44
consider the pros and cons of automation in AI technology by the means of
conducting workshops, seminars, and debates.
b) Integration of AI in Education. Interlink AI systems with the different kinds
of learning materials in a way that an AI background knowledge for all
classes will be attained. Let teachers develop digital literacy co-authoring AI-
powered learning activities, problems and assignments during which pupils
will analyze and solve problems and will be creative.
c) Ethical Education on AI. Offer training that is NTQ with lessons on ethics as
well as legitimate usage of AI in education. Emphasize the unavoidable
issues on privacy, bias, transparency and responsibility in the process of
launching AI and participating in the market. Issues of moral concern and
action require that you open dialogues to create awareness and set moral
standards in the mind of the students.
d) Collaborative Research and Future Studies. It should be of paramount
importance for a student to study together with the tutors, researches,
industry experts and all the AI related education stakeholders who would be
able to suggest the hottest and the most innovative areas in AI-enabled
education. Facilitate the shift of the traditional teacher-centered didactic
method to problem solving based learning model where the students will be
involved in more than just passive assimilation of information through active
joining in information co-creation and researching AI in education.

45
REFERENCES CITED
Barrett, M., Branson, L., Carter, S., Deleon, F., Ellis, J., Gunlach, C., & Lee, D.
(2019). Using artificial intelligence to enhance educational opportunities
and student services in higher education. Inquiry: The Journal of the
VirginiaCommunity Colleges, 22(1), 11.
Cognitive Load Theory http://tinyurl.com/yjdakdtx
Constructivism Theory http://tinyurl.com/e2xx7mst
Devi, S., Boruah, A. S., Nirban, S., Nimavat, D., & Bajaj, K. K. (2023). Ethical
Considerations in Using Artificial Intelligence to improve Teaching and
Learning. Tuijin Jishu/Journal of Propulsion Technology, 44(4), 1031-1038.
Estrellado, C. J., & Miranda, J. C. (2023). Artificial Intelligence in the Philippine

Educational Context: Circumspection and Future Inquiries. International
Journal of Scientific and Research Publications, 13(5).
Geronimo, R., Ortega, K. A., & Visitacion, E. L. Y. (2020). ABC’s of ABA of 2013:
A critique of Republic Act No. 10627, also known as The Anti-Bullying Act
of 2013.
Melchor, P. J. M., Lomibao, L. S., & Parcutilo, J. O. (2023). Exploring the

Potential of AI Integration in Mathematics Education for Generation Alpha-
Approaches, Challenges, and Readiness of Philippine Tertiary
Classrooms: A Literature Review. Journal of Innovations in Teaching and
Learning, 3(1), 39-44.
Meng, N., Dhimolea, T. K., & Ali, Z. (2022). AI-Enhanced Education: Teaching
and Learning Reimagined. In Bridging Human Intelligence and Artificial
Intelligence (pp.107-124). Cham: Springer International Publishing.
Pitogo, V. (2019, May). National Government Agency’s Compliance on Data

Privacy Act of 2012 a Case Study. In Journal of Physics Conference
Series (Vol. 1201, No. 1, p. 012021). IOP Publishing.
Self-determination Theory (SDT) http://tinyurl.com/2h6ysc93
Ubiña-Balagtas, M. Policy Brief Series.
Zawacki-Richter, O., Marin, 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 Education Technology
in Higher Education, 16(1), 1-27.
46
Zhai, X., Chu, X., Chai, C. S., Jong, M. S. Y., Istenicf, A., Spector, M., ...& Li, Y.
(2021). A Review of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Education from 2010 to
2020. Complexity, 2021, 1-18..
47
APPENDICES
48
Appendix A Research Title Approval Sheet

49
Appendix B Request Letter
Republic of the Philippines

Department of Education
Region VII – Central Visayas
Division, Corella, Bohol
February , 2024
NICETAS D. FUDOLIN, PhD., AFP

School Principal
Corella National High School
Sir,
Greetings!
The Technical-Vocational-Livelihood Track major Information and
Communication Technology, specialized in ICT students of Corella National High
School are conducting a research study on Student’s Perception Literacy and
Ethical Consideration in AI Enhanced Education.
In line with this, the researchers would like to ask your approval to allow us
to distribute the questionnaires to the random respondents at Corella National
High School to get the needed data for our study.
We are hoping for a favorable response on this matter.
Thank you very much and more power.
Note by:
Respectfully yours,
ALICE ALO ANGOY SANCHEZ B. SHEILO

Thesis Adviser Group Leader
MA. TERESA M. DAQUIO

Practical Research II Teacher
EUTEMIO G. BILOY
SHS Coordinator Approved by:
NICETAS D. FUDOLIN
School Principal
50
Appendix C Research Instrument
STUDENTS’ PERCEPTION LITERACY, AND ETHICAL CONSIDERATION IN

AI- ENHANCED EDUCATION
Dear Participants,
We are the Grade 12 ICT students from Corella National High School,
we are inviting you to participate in this research by completing the following
survey. The aim of this research is to provide a comprehensive understanding
of how Corella National High School students view and engage with AI in
education. The following questionnaire will require approximately 10 minutes to
complete. The data collected will remain confidential and solely for academic
purposes. Thank you for your cooperation and God bless.
Respectfully yours.
The researchers
Part I. Personal Information

Name (optional): ______________________________________
Age: _______ Sex: Male Female
Grade Level: ___________Strand:
What AI-technology (ies) do you use? You may check as many as you can.
Bard AI ChatGPT
Bing AI Jasper AI
Chat sonic Ask AI
Part II. Perception of AI in Education
Directions: Below is a checklist to rate your perception of AI-enhanced

education. Please put a checkmark for each statement that aligns with your
views.
Strongly Disagree Agree Strongly

Statements
51
Disagree (2) (3) Agree

(1) (4)
1. AI improves students’
grammar and sentences
construction.
2. AI helps students harness
their critical thinking skills.
3. AI technologies improve
educational content
quality
4. AI contributes to a more
personalized learning
experience
5. AI recommends relevant
learning material, books
and literature base on
students’ interest.
6. AI makes learning
accessible 24/7.
7. AI can adapt to each
students’ pace, learning
style and preferences.
8. AI can save teachers’ time
and provide students
quick feedback, helping
them improve faster.
9. AI can generate
educational content,
quizzes and practice
exercises which can
enhance teaching
materials.
10. Using AI in education has
increased students’
engagement and
motivation in learning.
52
Part III. Literacy Level on AI Enhanced Education.

Directions: Read the statement and determine whether it is true or false. Check
the appropriate column.
Statement TRUE FALSE
1. “AI”, or “artificial intelligence,” describes

the capacity of machines to learn, solve
problems, make decisions, and recognize
patterns, all of which are typically
associated with human intelligence.
2. Adapting AI in education requires no
critical thinking, creativity and
collaboration.
3. AI can enhance learning experiences and
provide personalized support.
4. AI can make ethical decisions without
human intervention.
5. AI can replace human teachers, as they
get more competent and can do a
broader range of tasks.
6. AI has the potential to address significant
challenges in education, such as
innovating teaching and learning
practices.
7. AI is a magic solution in education.
8. AI is a self-aware entity. It can process

information and respond with its own
ideas and feelings.
9. AI is accurate and always provides
correct information.
10. AI is created and programmed by
humans.
11. AI is only as good as the data and
algorithms it is trained on.
12. AI systems can accomplish tasks without
direct human decisions but cannot make
decisions themselves.
53
13. AI technologies in education always lead

to positive outcomes.
14. AI will surpass human intelligence.
15. All AI-powered educational tools are

beneficial and meet educational goals.
Part IV. Ethical Considerations of AI in Education.
Directions: Here is a checklist of ethical considerations in AI-enhanced

education. Please check the boxes that indicate how valuable each statement is
to you.
Strongly Not Not Consider Strongly
Statements Consider Consider (3) Consider
(1) (2) (4)
1. AI-generated
content for any
unfair or biased
outcomes.
2. Approach AI with a
critical mindset,
especially in
verifying facts.
3. Developing digital
literacy skills to
evaluate AI-
generated content
critically.
4. Integrity and
academic identity in
using AI.
5. My right to know
how decisions are
made and what
factors influence AI
recommendations.
54
6. Possible AI
limitations and risks.
7. Reporting errors,
biases or usability
issues for better
outcomes for all
users.
8. Seeking
clarifications for
incorrect information
or biased
information from AI-
generated content.
9. Seeking information
about how AI
systems work, their
benefits and
potential risks
before using it.
10. Sharing my
personal information
and privacy rights
are respected.
Thank you for answering this survey!
Answer Key of Literacy

1. True 7. False 13. False
2. False 8. False 14. False
3. True 9. False 15. False
4. False 10. True
5. False 11. True
6. True 12. True
55
Appendix E. Informed Consent

RESEARCH SUBJECT INFORMED CONSENT
To the participants:
Read this consent form and ask questions and clarification before you decide to
participate in this story or not. You are also free to ask question during to
participate in this research.
Research Title: Students’ Perception, Literacy , and Ethical Considerations

in AI-Enhanced Education
Researchers: SANCHEZ, SHEILO B. Phone: 09096490833

BUHION, ROSA BEL B. Department: Senior High School
. ERANA, DELIO JR. C.
School: Corella National High School
1. PURPOSE OF THIS STUDY

You are asked to participate in a research study that streamlines
registration procedures, address resource constrains cost-effectively, implement
privacy measure and improves communication channels between stake holders.
This study aims to provide a comprehensive understanding of how Corella
National High School students view and engage with AI in education, focusing on
their perception of AI’s effectiveness and impact on their learning experiences.
2. PROCEDURES
The researchers obtained formal permission from authorities to conduct
the study using school documents. After the approval, questionnaires were
personally administered to participants, and collected responses were analyzed
and statistically treated to test hypotheses.
56
3. POSSIBLE RISKS OR DISCOMFORT

No possible risks can pose danger to you in any form during the conduct of
this study.
4. POSSIBLE BENEFITS
The findings of this study benefits educators by aiding in the design of
more engaging and effective learning experiences. Policymakers gain insights to
enhance AI literacy and consider students perspective for future strategies.
Technology developers can use the findings to integrate ethical principles,
ensuring transparent and trustworthy AI tools aligned with ethical standards.
Students benefit by gaining a better understanding of ethical considerations,
enabling them to responsibly use AI-powered educational tools. Future
researcher can use the study as a guide for responsible AI use contributing
valuable insights for educators, policymakers, and technology developers.
5. FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS
No amount will be required from you during your participation in this study.
6. CONFIDENTIALY
Your identity in this study will be treated with utmost confidentiality. The
result will be published for academic purposes only.
7. TERMINATION OF RESEARCH STUDY

You are free to choose whether or not to participate in this study. There will
be no penalty if you choose not to participate. You may withdraw from your
participation at any time without penalty.
8. AVAILABLE SOURCE OF INFORMATION

Any further questions you have about this study will be answered by the
researcher.
57
9. AUTHORIZATION
I have read and understand this consent form, and I volunteer to
participate in this research study. I voluntarily choose to participate, but I
understand what my consent does not take away and legal rights in the case of
negligence or other legal fault by anyone who is involved in this study. I further
understand that nothing in this consent from is intended to replace any applicable
laws.
___________________________________
Participant’s Signature Over Printed Name
Date: ______________________________
___________________________________
Parent’s\Guardian’s Signature Over Printed Name (If underage)
Date: ______________________________
___________________________________
Researcher’s Signature Over Printed Name
Date: ______________________________
58
CURRICULUM VITAE
59
PERSONAL INFORMATION SHEET
Name : Sheilo B. Sanchez

Nick Name : “shei”
Age : 18
Gender : Male
Address : Fatima, Cortes, Bohol
Mobile Number : 09859722060
Email Address : sanchezxaissheilo@gmail.com
Date of Birth : May 28 2005
Place of Birth : Tubigon Hospital
Citizenship : Filipino
Religion : Roman Catholic
Father : Bernaldo Sanchez
Mother : Imelda B. Sanchez
Educational Background
a. Primary Education Fatima Elementary School
b. Junior High School Corella National High School
c. Senior High School Corella National High School
Ambition(s) in Life “To become a Radio Disc Jockey (DJ)”
Motto(s) in Life “Embrace each moment with kindness and gratitude”

60
Name : Rosa Bel Buhion

Nick Name : “Sabel”
Age : 18
Gender : Female
Address : San Isidro Tagbilaran City
Email Address : Buhionrosabel@gmail.com
Date of Birth : November 8, 2005
Place of Birth : Sambog Corella Bohol
Religion : Baptist
Father : Marciano Buhion
Mother : Elezabeth Buhion
a. Primary Education San Isidro Elementary School
Ambition(s) in Life “To become a Web Developer”
Motto(s) in Life “Stay positive, work hard, make it happen”

61
Name : Angelu Abby B. Cortez

Nick Name : “by”
Age : 17
Gender : Female
Address : Libertad baclayon Bohol
Email Address : AngeluAbbyCortez@gmail.com
Date of Birth : March 22, 2006
Place of Birth : Bravo. Gen. M. Natividad Nueva Ecija
Father : Amado P. Cortez
Mother : Hermes Cortez
a. Primary Education Libertad Elementary School
Ambition(s) in Life “To become a Systems Administrator”
Motto(s) in Life “Always believe that something wonderful is about to happen”

62
Name : Delio Jr. C. Erana

Nick Name : “Del”
Age : 17
Gender : Male
Address : Cabawan Dist. Tagbilaran City
Email Address : delio.jr.erana@gmail.com
Date of Birth : September 11, 2006
Place of Birth : Tagbilaran City
Father : Delio C. Erana
Mother : Fortunata C. Erana
a. Primary Education Cabawan Elementary School
Ambition(s) in Life “To become a professional Animator”
Motto(s) in Life “Life will not be fair, but you need to be kind every time”
63
Name : John Dwayne Pag-ong

Nick Name : “Dwayne”
Age : 17
Gender : Male
Address : Libertad Baclayon Bohol
Email Address : johndwaynepagong@gmail.com
Date of Birth : September 23, 2006
Place of Birth : Libertad Baclayon
Father : Artumio D. Pag-ong
Mother : Yolanda C. Pag-ong
a. Primary Education Libertad Baclayon Bohol
b. Junior High School Looc National High School
Ambition(s) in Life “To become a Computer Programer”
Motto(s) in Life “If you don’t take risk, you can’t create a future”
64
Name : Mary Jean Antipala

Nick Name : “Jean”
Age : 17
Gender : Female
Address : Cancatac, Corella, Bohol
Email Address : Maryjean@gmail.com
Date of Birth : October 21, 2006
Place of Birth : Tagbilaran City
Father : Merven Antipala
Mother : Niecel Antipala
a. Primary Education Rizal Catigbian Bohol
b. Junior High School Bugho Ma. Catigbian Bohol
Ambition(s) in Life “To become IT Consultant”
Motto(s) in Life “Be yourself”

65

ICT - Sanchez Et Al March 26 1

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

ICT - Sanchez Et Al March 26 1

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Students’ Perception, Literacy, and Ethical Considerations in AI-Enhanced

Grade 12- TVL ICT

CORELLA NATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL

Senior High School Department

Researchers: SANCHEZ, SHEILO B.

TITLE OF STUDY: STUDENTS’ PERCEPTION, LITERACY, AND

APPROVED: ALICE A. ANGOY, LPT Date,2020

REVIEWED: ANGIE NICA C. GA-AS, LPT Date,2020

KARINA L. PADAYHAG, LPT

ELLAGERE D. TUYAC, LPT

APPROVED: MA. TERESA M. DAQUIO, MA Date,2020

EUTEMIO G. BILOY, MA Date,2020

NICETAS D. FUDOLIN, PhD, AFP

The descriptive research attached hereto, “STUDENTS’ PERCEPTION,

ALICE A. ANGOY, LPT MA. TERESA M. DAQUIO, MA

Approved by the Thesis Committee at the oral examination conducted on

ANGIE NICA C. GA-AS

KARINA L. PADAYHAG, LPT ELLAGERE D. TUYAC, LPT

Accepted and approved as partial fulfillment of the requirements for the

NICETAS D. FUDOLIN, PhD, AFP

No table of figures entries found.

Figure 1 Schematic Diagram of the Study Error! Bookmark not defined.

THE PROBLEM AND ITS SCOPE

Background of the Study

The field of computer science dedicated in creating intelligent systems that

advancement. Artificial Intelligence has revolutionized the field of education,

enabling personalized data-driven, and adaptive learning experiences. However,

as AI integration in education gains momentum, it becomes essential to

investigate students' awareness, literacy, and utilization of AI technology and it’s

Al-powered tools and technologies can be used in different ways. For

benefits of Al in education, as It can improve students experience and motivation

ChatGPT, an AI-powered conversational agent is a widely recognized AI

tool in educational settings. ChatGPT utilizes natural language processing and

deep learning to engage in text-based conversations, answer questions, and

Nilsone's (2023) study, entitled “The Impact of Artificial Intelligence

amongst Higher Education Students,” intitle research highlights that ChatGPT is

students have reported positive or neutral experiences with AI-driven learning

AI literacy, encompassing the literacy, skills, and ethical understanding

needed to use AI technologies effectively, is emerging as a fundamental skill in

In this context, the study aims to provide a comprehensive understanding

education; focusing on their perception of AI's effectiveness and impact on their

their ethical considerations when using AI in education.

This study is about student’s perception, literacy, and ethical consideration

in AI enhanced education. It is anchored on the theories, legal bases, review of

related literature, and related studies.

The first theory is the Constructivism Theory. According to Jean Piaget

(1997), constructivism is a theory of knowledge which humans generate

ideas. It is an interaction between one’s experiences and reflexes or behavior

patterns during infancy.

This theory provides personalized learning, interactive engagement, timely

idea that students actively construct their understanding.

Second theory is Self-determination Theory (SDT), developed by

Edward L. Deci and Richard M. Ryan; in 2012. It is an empirically derived theory

of human motivation and personality in social contexts that differentiates

motivation in terms of being autonomous and controlled. SDT is focused on

variables that promote learning autonomy, competence, and relatedness as well

SDT provides learners with autonomy by allowing them to make choices

about their learning paths. It promotes competence by offering tailored feedback

and adaptive learning resources.

Last theory is the Cognitive Load Theory. According to John Sweller

(2011), cognitive load theory is an instructional theory based on a person’s

architecture to generate experimental instructional effects. These effects are

demonstrated when novel instructional procedures are used in a randomized and