As ChatGPT and other major language models enter the general public consciousness, school boards are drafting policies, universities are holding symposiums, and so forth Tech firms are relentlessly promoting their latest AI-powered learning tools.
In the race to modernize education, artificial intelligence (AI) has grow to be the brand new darling of policy innovation. While AI guarantees In addition to efficiency and personalization, it also brings with it complexity, ethical dilemmas and recent requirements.
Teachers, who’re at the guts of learning alongside students, are watching this shift with growing concern. For example, in response to the Alberta Teachers' Association80 to 90 percent of educators surveyed expressed concerns concerning the potential negative impact of AI on education.
To understand comprehensive policy requirements, we must first understand classrooms—and teachers’ current realities.
As a researcher with expertise in technology-enhanced teaching and learning on the intersections of assessment, leadership and policy, I interviewed teachers from across Canada with Erik Sveinson, a Bachelor of Education student. We asked her about it their experiences with generative AI (GenAI) within the classroom.
Their stories help contextualize the truth of AI within the K-12 context and supply insights into harnessing the potential of AI without harming education as a human-centered endeavor.
AI policy and teaching wisdom
Ten teachers (grades 5 to 12) from Alberta, Saskatchewan, Ontario, and British Columbia participated on this qualitative study.
We recruited participants through skilled learning networks, teacher associations, and district contacts, attempting to make sure a diversity of perspectives from different grade levels, subjects, and geographic locations.
We coded the interview data thematically after which compared it with findings from a review of existing research on the usage of GenAI in K-12 classrooms. We have highlighted convergences or tensions between theories of assessment, approaches to teaching in technology-enabled environments, student learning, and educator practices.
In the interviews, teachers described a growing gap between political expectations and the emotional realities of classroom practice.
THE CANADIAN PRESS/Amber Bracken
What we heard
The following themes emerged from our interviews:
1. The valuation crisis: Long-standing assessment tools akin to the essay or the take-home project have suddenly grow to be vulnerable. Teachers spend countless hours questioning the authenticity of student work.
All teachers surveyed consistently reported challenges with their current assessment practices and the way in which students may use GenAI at work. Confidence within the reliability of the reviews was a challenge. The majority of teachers shared that as GenAI technology advances, they feel like they must expect students to cheat greater than ever.
2. Equity dilemmas: Teachers are on the forefront of seeing first-hand which students have full access to the newest AI tools at home and which don’t.
3. Teachers perceive each opportunities and challenges with AI. Good teaching is about promoting critical considering and human relationships. Ninety percent of teachers surveyed faced complex challenges related to equity and the way best to advertise critical considering within the classroom while constructing foundational knowledge. In particular, middle and highschool teachers in core subjects reported students using GenAI tools of their free time outside of sophistication without ethical guidance.
“One other thing piled up”
A central Alberta teacher said:
“AI is certainly helpful to my workflow, but immediately it seems like I'm adding another thing to an already not possible workload. The policy says 'embrace innovation', but where is the guidance and support?”
Classrooms are dynamic ecosystems characterised by emotions, relationships, and unpredictability. Teachers navigate trauma, neurodiversity, language barriers, and social inequities while implementing curriculum and meeting student performance expectations.
Teachers say there may be little recognition for this cognitive load they already entail, or the time it takes to review, adapt and ethically use AI tools. They say AI policies often treat educators as passive implementers of technology relatively than energetic agents of learning.
A highschool teacher from Eastern Canada shared:
“AI doesn't understand the emotional labor of teaching. It can't recognize the trauma behind a student's meltdown. As much as I value skilled learning, if it's nearly which tools to make use of, it misses the purpose.”
This perspective underscores a broader insight: teachers will not be against AI per se; They resist implementation that ignores their emotional expertise and contextual judgment. They want skilled learning initiatives that take note of the human and relational dimensions of their work.
Burnout, skilled erosion
This separation is just not just theoretical, it’s emotional. Teachers report burnout, anxiety and a sense of skilled erosion. A Study 2024 found that 76.9 percent of Canadian educators felt emotionally exhausted and nearly half had considered leaving the career. Introducing AI without proper training or support exacerbates this stress.
There can be a growing fear being reported Alberta Teachers' Association that AI could deskill the career if not implemented properly with support for teachers recent to the career.
THE CANADIAN PRESS/Jason Franson
A teacher in Vancouver shared:
“I’m an experienced teacher and understand the fundamentals of teaching. What happens to teacher autonomy and the art of teaching when algorithms write report cards or create lesson plans?”
Turn your lesson right into a checklist?
Overall, the interview responses suggest that AI policy lacks a fundamental understanding Teaching as a people-centered career. How policymakers are in a rush Integrate AI into digitized classroomsthey’re missing a vital truth: technology cannot fix what it could not understand.
Without clear Guidelines and skilled learning based on teacher and student informed needsThere is a risk that AI will grow to be a tool for surveillance and standardization relatively than for empowerment.
This tension between innovation and deprofessionalization was evident in most of the teachers' answers. Teachers expressed optimism about AI's potential to cut back workload, but in addition expressed deep unease about the way it could undermine their skilled judgment and relational role with students.
A Northern Ontario teacher said:
“New technologies offer hope, but I worry that AI will turn teaching right into a checklist. We will not be technicians, we’re mentors, guides and sometimes lifelines.”
Teachers fear that without educator-led frameworks, AI could transform school teaching from human-centered practice to rule-compliant practice.
Responsible AI policy
If we would like to harness the potential of AI without harming education as a human-centered endeavor with students and teachers at its core, we’d like to rethink approaches to AI innovation in education. That starts with listening to teachers.
The teachers have to be involved the design, testing and evaluation of AI tools. Policies must prioritize ethics, transparency and justice. This includes regulating the usage of student data, ensuring that teachers can discover algorithmic bias and ethical implications, and likewise protecting teacher discretion.
Third, we’d like to decelerate. The The pace of AI innovation is dizzyingbut education is just not a startup. It is a public good. Guidelines have to be evidence-based and based on the lived experiences of teachers.
