Latent Class Analysis identifies six provisional manager typologies with heterogeneous readiness and barrier profiles¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · associational r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 2026 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person · recheck by 2031: baselines and conditions change

Subclaims¶

q2 i? LCA identified six provisional classes, including the largest Competency-constrained class (25.6%) and Barrier-free skeptics (10.6%) who showed the highest readiness yet the highest AI distrust. → V.G. Kremen 2026 q2 i? Bootstrap stability of the six-class solution was poor (mean ARI = 0.385), so the typology is exploratory. → V.G. Kremen 2026 (2)

Evidence¶

V.G. Kremen 2026¶

V.G. Kremen, O.M. Spirin, O.I. Liashenko, S.H. Lytvynova, Y.I. Malovanyi, O.P. Pinchuk, O.M. Sokolyuk, S.O. Semerikov. (2026). AI adoption readiness among Ukrainian education managers: Barriers, typologies, and policy implications. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence 11 (2026) 100648. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2026.100648

q2 · i? · associational · r1

Gaussian Mixture Model-based LCA on survey indicators from 395 managers, with class range 2–6 and BIC-based selection. Class profiles ranged from Competency-constrained (25.6%, largest) to Barrier-free skeptics (10.6%, highest readiness 3.52 with 74% AI distrust).

"LCA identified six provisional manager classes, supporting H2. Across the 2–6 class range, BIC decreased monotonically ( Table 5 ; Fig. 6 ) without reaching a clear minimum, so the six-class solution is best understood as the most granular interpretable partition examined rather than a BIC-identified optimum"

V.G. Kremen 2026 (2)¶

V.G. Kremen, O.M. Spirin, O.I. Liashenko, S.H. Lytvynova, Y.I. Malovanyi, O.P. Pinchuk, O.M. Sokolyuk, S.O. Semerikov. (2026). AI adoption readiness among Ukrainian education managers: Barriers, typologies, and policy implications. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence 11 (2026) 100648. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2026.100648

q2 · i? · associational · r1

Bootstrap stability analysis with 100 resamples of the six-class LCA solution, evaluated with the Adjusted Rand Index. The authors report poor stability and treat the typology as exploratory and provisional.

"Bootstrap stability analysis indicated poor classification stability (mean ARI = 0.385, 95% CI [0.184, 0.702]), so the typology is interpreted throughout as exploratory and provisional, requiring confirmation with larger samples"

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Regulatory absence and digital competency gaps are the most prevalent barriers to AI adoption among Ukrainian education managers — related
• Latent profile analysis of pre-service teachers' ChatGPT acceptance yields four highly distinguishable profiles, with Pragmatic Evaluators the largest (47.66%) — related
• Exploratory K-means clustering identifies four heterogeneous student AI-user profiles differing in experience, competence, usefulness, trust, and control, but the solution's optimality and stability are not established — related
• Latent profile analysis of combined SR and OB factors identifies six distinct teacher profiles spanning overestimation, underestimation, and alignment — related
• Cluster analysis identifies three stable learner profiles: Engaged and Literate, Uncritical Reliant, and Skeptical Minimal users — related
• Learners' generative-AI use profiles are heterogeneous, with extractive delegation more common than potentially collaborative use — related
• Latent profile analysis of 2015 PISA data identifies four collaborative problem-solver profiles among Chinese 15-year-old students — related
• Latent class analysis failed to discriminate ACE clusters in the Millennium Cohort Study data — related
• Latent class analysis of 641 higher education students' survey responses identifies four distinct classes of feedback experience — related
• Four distinct LLM learner profiles emerge from latent class analysis of learning contexts, tasks, and devices — related