Towards Designing AI-Enhanced Lesson Structure in Grade 9 Science

This study explores the need for designing an artificial intelligence (AI)-embedded lesson structure in Grade 9 science education, with a focus on integrating sustainability concepts in response to the demands of Education 4.0. Grounded in the context of the Industrial Revolution 4.0, the research investigates learners’, and science teachers’ readiness, perceptions, and needs regarding AI and sustainability integration in science instruction. Using a descriptive mixed-methods research design, data were collected through a researcher-developed needs assessment survey administered to 48 Grade 9 learners and 7 science teachers in a public secondary school. Quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, while qualitative responses were examined through thematic analysis. Findings reveal that learners demonstrate high familiarity with AI tools and show strong interest in using AI for solving scientific and community-related problems. However, their understanding of the connection between science concepts and sustainability remains limited. Teachers exhibit willingness to integrate AI into instruction but face significant barriers, including lack of access to devices, unstable internet connectivity, and insufficient pedagogical support. Triangulation of data indicates that while awareness and motivation among stakeholders are evident, institutional capacity and instructional design support remain key challenges. The study concludes that effective integration of AI in science education requires not only technological access but also structured lesson designs that explicitly connect AI tools, scientific concepts, and sustainability issues. It highlights the importance of addressing infrastructure gaps and enhancing teacher competencies to support meaningful AI integration. The findings provide a basis for developing an AI-embedded lesson framework that promotes critical thinking, problem-solving, and real-world application of science learning aligned with sustainable development goals

Artificial Intelligence in Education; Science Education; Sustainability; AI-Embedded Lessons

1. Adams, R. (2025, October 15). Pupils fear AI is eroding their ability to study, research finds. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2025/oct/15/pupils-fear-ai-eroding-study-ability-research?utm_source=chatgpt.com [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Almasri, F. (2024). Exploring the Impact of Artificial intelligence in teaching and learning of Science: A Systematic Review of Empirical research. Research in Science Education, 54(5), 977–997. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-024-10176-3 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Almasri, F., Hewapathirana, G. I., Alhashem, F., Daniel, C. E., & Lee, N. (2022). The effect of gender composition and pedagogical approach on major and non-major undergraduates biology students’ achievement. Interactive Learning Environments, 31(10), 7287–7319. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2022.2066138 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Alvero, J. C. M. (2025). TPACK-Based Assessment of Faculty Integration of Artificial Intelligence in General Education Courses toward Advancing SDG 4: Basis for a Faculty Capacity Development program. Cognizance Journal of Multidisciplinary Studies, 5(10), 472–485. https://doi.org/10.47760/cognizance.2025.v05i10.043 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Anderson, R. E., & Dexter, S. (2005). School Technology Leadership: An Empirical Investigation of Prevalence and Effect. Educational Administration Quarterly, 41(1), 49–82. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161x04269517 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Antonio, R. (2025). Fostering preservice science teachers’ AI-Tpack competence and reflections through an AI-focused pedagogical learning course. Journal of Technology and Science Education, 15(3), 784. https://doi.org/10.3926/jotse.3693 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Digital Education Council. (2024). What Students Want: Key Results from DEC Global AI Student Survey 2024. https://www.digitaleducationcouncil.com/post/what-students-want-key-results-from-dec-global-ai-student-survey-2024?utm_source=chatgpt.com [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. ElSayary, A., Murshidi, G. A., Ragab, K., & Zaabi, A. A. (2026). AI transformation in education: Examining teachers’ perceptions using an integrated TAM-TPACK-GenAI framework. Contemporary Educational Technology, 18(1), ep636. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/17983 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Ergen, M. (2019). What is Artificial Intelligence? Technical Considerations and Future Perception. The Anatolian Journal of Cardiology, 22(), 5-7. https://doi.org/10.14744/AnatolJCardiol.2019.79091 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Gu, X., & Ericson, B. J. (2025). AI Literacy in K-12 and Higher Education in the wake of Generative AI: An Integrative review. arXiv (Cornell University). https://doi.org/10.48550/arxiv.2503.00079 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Gunder, A., & Ford, C. (2025). AI Literacies and the TPACK Framework: Insights from a Global Study on AI in Education. Ubiquity Proceedings, 36. https://doi.org/10.5334/uproc.204 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Holme, T. A. (2021). Considering the call to action for science education. Journal of Chemical Education, 98(9), 2739–2740. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.1c00909 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Hong, F., Dou, W., & Chen, S. (2022). Research on the Impact of Artificial intelligence on Government public service Quality. In Atlantis Highlights in Computer Sciences/Atlantis highlights in computer sciences (pp. 731–740). https://doi.org/10.2991/978-94-6463-016-9_74 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Lu, C., Chen, K., Wu, H., & Lou, S. (2018). A Study on Bionic Design Approach to Sustainability of Product Design STEM Project-Based Learning. Creative Education, 09(16), 2732–2751. https://doi.org/10.4236/ce.2018.916206 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge: a framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record the Voice of Scholarship in Education, 108(6), 1017–1054. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9620.2006.00684.x [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. ‍Mulyani, M. A., Yusuf, S., Siregar, P., Nurihsan, J., Razzaq, A., & Anshari, M. (2021). Fourth Industrial Revolution and educational challenges. 2021 International Conference on Information Management and Technology (ICIMTech). https://doi.org/10.1109/icimtech53080.2021.9535057 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Ning, Y., Zhang, C., Xu, B., Zhou, Y., & Wijaya, T. T. (2024). Teachers’ AI-TPACK: Exploring [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. the Relationship between Knowledge Elements. Sustainability, 16(3), 978. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16030978 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Oved, O., & Alt, D. (2025). Teachers’ technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) as a precursor to their perceived adopting of educational AI tools for teaching purposes. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Education and Information Technologies. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-025-13371-5 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Scott, H. K., & Cogburn, M. (2023, January 9). Piaget. StatPearls - NCBI Bookshelf. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK448206/#:~:text=The%20stage%20of%20formal%20operations%20is%20the,and%2C%20ultimately%2C%20isolating%20variables%20and%20examining%20combinations. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. ‍Shahroom, A. A., & Hussin, N. (2018). Industrial Revolution 4.0 and Education. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 8(9). https://doi.org/10.6007/ijarbss/v8-i9/4593 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Siedlecki, S. L. (2019). Understanding descriptive research designs and methods. Clinical Nurse Specialist, 34(1), 8–12. https://doi.org/10.1097/nur.0000000000000493 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. UNESCO. (2023, July 25). Education for Sustainable Development Goals: learning objectives. https://www.unesco.org/en/articles/education-sustainable-development-goals-learning-objectives [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. 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). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-019-0171-0 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• What the Desert Fathers Teach Data Scientists: Ancient Ascetic Principles for Ethical Machine-Learning Practice
• Comparative Analysis of Some Machine Learning Algorithms for the Classification of Ransomware
• Comparative Performance Analysis of Some Priority Queue Variants in Dijkstra’s Algorithm
• Transfer Learning in Detecting E-Assessment Malpractice from a Proctored Video Recordings.
• Dual-Modal Detection of Parkinson’s Disease: A Clinical Framework and Deep Learning Approach Using NeuroParkNet