Roseanne Kheir Farraj, Aya Onallah, Nizar Bitar E25 Theme 1: Teachers as Indispensable Language Knowers First, teachers consistently positioned themselves as the primary source of linguistic and pedagogical knowledge, responsible for providing the foundational skills-grammar, vocabulary, and critical strategies-that are prerequisite for students’ meaningful engagement with AI. They argued this expertise was crucial not only for academic success but for safeguarding vulnerable learners from AI dependency and for maintaining a "human-in-the-loop" approach to pedagogy. One teachercoordinator stated, "I don’t think we can give up on the foundation stones of language because no matter if we use AI or not, grammar and vocabulary are essential" (Emily). This perspective was particularly pronounced when considering weaker students, whom teachers feared would use AI as an "escape" from learning, thereby deepening their disadvantages. Furthermore, teachers emphasized that their own professional expertise was the anchor of responsible AI use, allowing them to critically evaluate, reject, or accept AI-generated materials to ensure they align with pedagogical goals, as another teacher explained: "[Teachers] would come to me and ask how to phrase something or if a task matches the goal of the unit... so we still have a role that cannot be replaced" (Ashley). Theme 2: Teachers as Providers of Irreplaceable Emotional Care Second, teachers universally emphasized that their role extends far beyond cognitive instruction to include the provision of emotional and relational support. They asserted that the "human touch" is a dimension of teaching that AI cannot replicate. This theme had two facets. The first was the individual human connection, centered on empathy and encouragement. As one teacher explained, "the machine can never replace human interaction… these human capacities which I think help our students much more than the machine can" (Nicole). The second facet was the cultivation of the classroom as a collective safe space, an environment where students feel secure enough to take risks and make mistakes. This was contrasted with the potentially isolating experience of learning with a machine. One teacher summarized this conviction: "[Students] need a face, to connect it to the material; they need a face to feel safe, to feel secure, to make mistakes" (Rania). For these educators, creating this environment of trust and belonging is a defining, and uniquely human, element of their professional identity. Theme 3: Teachers as Supervisors of AI Use Third, teachers described their evolving role as supervisors of AI integration, a journey that began with a protective, prohibitive stance and moved toward a model of critical guidance. Initially, their approach was driven by deep concerns for academic integrity and pedagogical equity, fearing that unregulated AI use would lead to plagiarism and cognitive dependency. As one teacher warned, quoting Chomsky, AI is "a tool for plagiarism" and its use "feels kind of like cheating" (Elias). However, this defensive posture shifted toward a more proactive model of critical integration. Teachers began to see their responsibility not as gatekeepers, but as facilitators of digital judgment, actively training students in how to use AI tools ethically and effectively. This involved redesigning tasks to make AI use transparent and purposeful, thereby rendering cheating unproductive. As one faculty member noted, "how we structure a task makes cheating not useful. We’re already giving you the option of using AI, so you don’t need to cheat" (Ahmad). Theme 4: Teachers as AI-Augmented Pedagogues Finally, teachers envisioned themselves becoming AI-augmented pedagogues, integrating AI into their own professional lives while cultivating new literacies in their students. They described using AI
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy Mjk0MjAwOQ==