Bridging the Gap: The Need for Applying Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Private Kindergarten Administration in Bangkok under the Preschool Education Association of Thailand (P.E.A.T.)

Article Sidebar

PDF
Published: Jun 1, 2026
Keywords:
Artificial Intelligence (AI); Educational Administration; Early Childhood Education; Gap Analysis; PNIModified; Thailand

Main Article Content

Kunlayanee Bunyaraksh
Major of Educational Administration and Leadership, The College of Educational Innovation, Saint John's University, Thailand
Anutsara Suwanwong
Major of Educational Administration and Leadership, The College of Educational Innovation, Saint John's University, Thailand

Abstract

This study adopts the Gap Analysis Framework and the Modified Priority Needs Index (PNIModified), conceptually derived from the needs assessment approach of Witkin and Altschuld (1995). Data were collected during the Academic Year 2025. The contribution of this study lies in identifying AI needs within kindergarten administration, a context distinct from K–12 and higher education because AI implementation must balance pedagogical support, child development, ethical safeguards, and parent engagement. This working paper investigates the need for applying Artificial Intelligence (AI) in private kindergarten administration in Bangkok under the Preschool Education Association of Thailand (P.E.A.T.). Using a quantitative research design grounded in the Gap Analysis Framework, the study examines discrepancies between current and desired conditions across six administrative dimensions: Administrative Efficiency, Data Management and Analytics, Communication and Engagement, Instructional Support, Quality Assurance and Compliance, and Change Readiness and Professional Development. Data were collected from 175 administrators and analyzed using descriptive statistics and the Priority Needs Index (PNIModified). The findings reveal a substantial gap between current implementation (x̄ = 2.55) and desired conditions (x̄ = 4.58), indicating a strong demand for systematic AI integration. Instructional Support emerged as the highest priority (PNIModified = 1.01), followed by Quality Assurance and Compliance (0.98) and Data Management and Analytics (0.97). The results suggest that AI is perceived not merely as a tool for efficiency, but as a strategic mechanism for enhancing pedagogical quality, strengthening governance, and enabling data-driven decision-making. The study highlights the need for systemic alignment, infrastructure development, and professional capacity building to support sustainable AI adoption in early childhood education administration. The contribution of this study lies in identifying AI needs within kindergarten administration, a context that differs substantially from K–12 and higher education settings because AI implementation must balance administrative efficiency with child development principles, ethical safeguards, and parent engagement. The findings, therefore, contribute not only to educational administration literature but also to emerging policy discussions concerning responsible AI integration in early childhood education.

Article Details

How to Cite
Bunyaraksh, K., & Suwanwong, A. . (2026). Bridging the Gap: The Need for Applying Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Private Kindergarten Administration in Bangkok under the Preschool Education Association of Thailand (P.E.A.T.). International Journal of Development Administration Research, 9(2), 35–44. retrieved from https://so02.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/ijdar/article/view/286829
Issue
Vol. 9 No. 2 (2026): April-June
Section
Articles
Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

 

License Terms

All articles published in this journal are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution–NonCommercial–NoDerivatives 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0).

Under this license, users are permitted to:

  • Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format.

Under the following conditions:

  1. Attribution (BY)

Users must give appropriate credit to the author(s) and the journal, provide a link to the license, and indicate if any changes were made. Attribution must not suggest endorsement by the author(s) or the journal.

  1. NonCommercial (NC)

The material may not be used for commercial purposes. Any use primarily intended for or directed toward commercial advantage or monetary compensation is prohibited without prior written permission from the copyright holder.

  1. NoDerivatives (ND)

If users remix, transform, translate, adapt, or build upon the material, they may not distribute the modified material. The work must be shared in its original and unaltered form.

This license ensures that published works remain freely accessible to the academic community and the public, while protecting the integrity of the original research and the rights of the author(s).

For the full legal code of this license, please visit:
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/

 

References

Ahmad, M., Tan, C. S., & Abdullah, N. (2022). AI in school administration: Enhancing efficiency through data analytics. Journal of Educational Innovation, 8(3), 215–229.

Bertalanffy, L. von. (1968). General system theory: Foundations, development, applications. George Braziller.

Chen, L., Zhang, S., & Wei, P. (2022). Artificial intelligence in educational management: Opportunities and challenges. Educational Review, 74(4), 602–618.

Chen, X., Li, L., Li, X., & Li, J. (2021). A review of personalized learning based on artificial intelligence. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 16(4), 35–47.

Igbokwe, I. C. (2023). Application of artificial intelligence (AI) in educational management. International Journal of Scientific and Research Publications, 13(3), 300–307. https://doi.org/10.29322/IJSRP.13.03.2023.p13536

Kotter, J. P. (1996). Leading change. Harvard Business School Press.

Krejcie, R. V., & Morgan, D. W. (1970). Determining sample size for research activities. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 30(3), 607–610. https://doi.org/10.1177/001316447003000308

Lewin, K. (1947). Frontiers in group dynamics. Human Relations, 1(2), 143–153. https://doi.org/10.1177/001872674700100201

Liu, M., Ren, Y., Nyagoga, L. M., Stonier, F., Wu, Z., & Yu, L. (2023). Future of education in the era of generative artificial intelligence: Consensus among Chinese scholars on applications of ChatGPT in schools. Future in Educational Research, 1(1), 72–101. https://doi.org/10.1002/fer3.10

Obona, E. E., Madukwe, E. C., Osha, M. I., & Willie, T. B. (2024). Artificial intelligence (AI) in school administration: Application, benefits, and challenges. SJCIE, 5(1), 251–256.

OECD. (2021). Artificial intelligence in education: Challenges and opportunities. OECD Publishing.

Office of the Education Council. (2017). National education plan (2017–2036). Ministry of Education.

Office of the Education Council. (2020). AI for learning development. Office of the Education Council.

Office of the Private Education Commission. (2020). Guidelines for private school quality assurance. Ministry of Education.

Ogunode, N. J., & Gregory, D. M. (2025). Artificial intelligence in educational administration. Open Access Journal of Educational Innovation, 11(4), 66–78.

Preschool Education Association of Thailand. (2023). Mission and organizational roles in early childhood education. Author.

Tan, J., & Kaur, P. (2023). AI-based communication tools in education. Computers & Education, 188, 104600. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2022.104600

Wang, X., & Li, J. (2023). AI-driven analytics and administrative transparency in preschool education. Computers & Education, 194, 104736.

Witkin, B. R., & Altschuld, J. W. (1995). Planning and conducting needs assessments. Sage Publications.

World Bank. (2024). The AI revolution in education: Building data-informed systems for the future. World Bank Publications.