Powerful Teaching and Learning

Harnessed appropriately, GenAI can be a catalyst for pedagogical models that increase equitable learning conditions, foster learner agency, and equip students with highly valued future-forward skills. However, we must not treat GenAI as though it is a magic bullet that will miraculously improve student outcomes. Whether our instructional goals aim toward content achievement, digital literacy, or workforce skills, we should anchor instructional choices in a vision for powerful teaching and learning. 

Use the information in this section to spark conversations around the true value of GenAI-use in the classroom. Dialogue among teachers, administrators, instructional coaches, and curriculum leaders will help frame your organization’s perspective on powerful practices for teaching and learning in an AI-powered world.

Educators can lean into the Arizona Academic Standards, including those for Computer Science, Educational Technology, and content areas to anchor instructional decisions.

AI literacy is the knowledge and skills that enable humans to critically understand, use, and evaluate AI systems and tools to safely and ethically participate in an increasingly digital world (Digital Promise, 2024). 

As educators, we help shape students’ understanding of the world to prepare them for active engagement in it. Because GenAI will continue to transform the way we work and live, we must make AI literacy a priority for all students and adults in our communities. Creating an AI-literate population is the only true approach to shaping an AI-driven world that is safe and just. AI-literate individuals are better equipped to be proactive and participatory in shaping the technology’s use within our schools and our lives. 

Our team’s unwavering stance on the importance of AI Literacy as a core skill for the future has led to its inclusion at several points throughout this guidance document. We encourage all LEAs to create an AI Literacy plan that includes curriculum and professional development affixed to the Arizona Academic Standards. 

Teaching AI Literacy 

Developing AI literacy means much more than knowing how to use tools. In addition to foundational AI knowledge, it also includes understanding ethical implications, employing critical thinking to determine when and how it is used, evaluating its output, knowing and applying safeguards, and more. AI literacy can be taught to students of all ages, and many lessons, especially those for young students, do not require the use of AI. 

• AI literacy frameworks and lessons can be found on the “Additional Resources” page within this document. 

• Engaging students in meaningful dialogue around appropriate, ethical, and effective AI use helps build AI literacy skills. Using an AI Use Scale can help guide discussions. 

• AI literacy intersects with other emerging literacies such as digital literacy, media literacy, and digital citizenship. Integrating these skills into content areas helps ground them in meaningful, real-world contexts.

Integrating GenAI into the classroom marks a transformative shift in educational practice as teachers and students use it to shift learning models where teachers serve as facilitators who coach students to develop learning agency. While some educators at first feared that AI would reduce the human aspect of teaching, if used appropriately, it holds vast potential to foster a more humanistic approach. 

We share the classroom use cases below to paint a picture of the possibilities of intentional use of GenAI. Applications like these can improve instruction and create more space for human interaction between teachers and students. 

Teacher Use Cases 

GenAI offers teachers a wide range of applications that can simplify routine tasks, create learning materials, or serve as a thought partner. Initially, educators may be most excited to use tools to accomplish everyday tasks more quickly. However, the real value of saving time happens when teachers reinvest that time into creating more effective lessons, fostering relationships, and having more real-time academic conversations with students. 

Consider how the following examples of teacher use may foster a culture of personalized and inclusive education with strong teacher/student connections.

Student Use Cases 

When ChatGPT was first released, it conjured images of students furiously copying and pasting, which some thought would surely be the demise of education. While this is an understandable first reaction, it is only so in the context of assignments and assessments that can be easily generated, copied, and pasted. In other words, GenAI can be the catalyst to push beyond the status quo of multiple-choice tests and basic essays, rethinking what we ask students to do and why. 

GenAI offers capabilities that can allow students to be more independent and self-directed in their learning journey. Students may find additional uses that bring out curiosity, creativity, and reflection. Consider the following examples of student use.

Although there are many exciting possibilities for teacher and student use, educators also have a responsibility to consider possible downsides. In the spirit of the balanced approach this guidance seeks to encourage, consider these risks to integrating GenAI into teaching and learning practices.

• Over-Reliance on Technology: No technology can replace the deep understanding that educators have of their students’ unique needs and preferences. Nor can it improve student learning if it is used as a crutch. 

• Dependence on Specific Tools: GenAI tools are usually developed and maintained by private companies who may decide to stop offering the tool or change pricing in ways that are prohibitive for LEAs to fund its use. 

• Accuracy and Quality Assurance: Some educators may find it challenging to verify the accuracy and quality of GenAI-generated content. 

• Loss of Human Interaction: Automating solutions creates a risk of decreased human interaction (adult-student, adult-adult, student-student) in exchange for efficiency. In turn, this presents the potential to exacerbate loneliness, isolation, and anxiety. 

• Implementation Dip: As GenAI and its use in education continues to evolve, we will learn more about best practices. In the meantime, it could result in an “implementation dip” with a beginning-stage net negative impact.

Citation and Disclosure 

It is true that integrating GenAI into our creative processes introduces more complexity to practices that ensure transparency and ethical use of tools and content. For example, citing AI use becomes challenging when AI technology is embedded into other digital tools (Bauschard, 2024). Additionally, as educators and students adopt a collaborative approach with AI (Human -> AI-> Human) it becomes difficult to distinguish the contributions made independently from those generated by AI. 

Despite these complexities, the overarching goal remains: to uphold transparency. Adults and students should strive to consistently be clear and forthright about the extent to which GenAI tools have been utilized in the creation of academic work. Communicating clear disclosure expectations to students strengthens their AI literacy as they learn when and how to be transparent about GenAI use. 

The following resources provide a sample of how to formally cite the use of AI: 

• MLA Style - Generative AI 

• APA Style - ChatGPT 

• Chicago Style - Generative AI 

A general “AI-use” statement may be used when a formal academic citation is not necessary or appropriate. 

Example: I used AI tools to help with this assignment. AI helped me with [specific task, e.g., researching, organizing ideas, editing, etc.], but the final work is my own. I understand how AI works and made sure to check the information it gave me.

AI Detectors 

In the pursuit of upholding academic integrity, some teachers and administrators have looked to AI detectors to combat cheating and plagiarism. The primary problem with this approach is that AI detectors have proven to be unreliable. Their frequent false positives punish students whose first language isn’t English at a higher rate (Sample, 2023). What’s more, students with higher AI literacy are more likely to get past the detector. 

For these reasons, AI detectors should not be used as a sole source of determining whether plagiarism has occurred. Rather than relying on flawed technology, a more effective approach is to clearly communicate expectations, discuss effective use, and scaffold AI literacy skills by using an AI Use Scale such as the one developed by Perkins, Furze, Roe & MacVaugh (2024). Encourage open communication and nurture students’ intrinsic motivation by offering students choices and opportunities to explore their interests within assignments (Clark, n.d.).