Notes Along the Way -- Asbury 2.3 -- Barth and Bultmann

For the previous breadcrumb, click here.
_________________
1. Last week, I mentioned that I would eventually get to Rudolf Bultmann (1884-1976). I decided that this week was actually a good time.

Bultmann was quite the boogie man in seminary, another person for me to mock. Certainly someone for Wang to mock. Why? Because he didn't think that the resurrection was historical.

Wang's arguments for the resurrection have blurred in my mind with Jimmy Dunn's, my Doktorvater. Dunn's book on the subject was The Evidence for Jesus. 

The historical argument for the resurrection hangs on two key points: 1) the empty tomb and 2) the eyewitnesses to the resurrection. Both seem beyond reasonable doubt to me. That is to say, the body of Jesus was not to be found on Easter Sunday, and a lot of people were convinced that they had seen Jesus alive thereafter. 

A force multiplier for the second point is the fact that 1) they were not expecting a resurrection and 2) many were so convinced that they were willing to suffer and die for that belief.

A corroborating argument for the first -- one that I may have first heard from Wang -- is that the rumor in Matthew 28 that the disciples stole the body only makes sense if in fact there was no body to be found.

Bultmann did not believe that the resurrection really happened in history.

2. However, if God takes the heart into account, Bultmann was actually trying to save Christian faith in his own way. That is to say, his head told him that the "Jesus of history" was not the "Christ of faith." He believed, like Albert Schweitzer, that Jesus was an apocalyptic prophet who died with great disappointment.

But Bultmann believed in the "Christ of faith" as he understood him. He believed that the resurrection was a metaphor or a parable for an existentialist choice. I'm sure that many of you are thinking, "What are you talking about?" Welcome to seminary.

Existentialism is a philosophical school that basically holds that we have to choose the meaning of life. For Kierkegaard, this is a leap of blind faith. It is a very personal choice. For 1950s existentialists like Sartre or Camus, life in itself is actually meaningless. But that's the glass is half empty way to look at it. The positive way to think of it is that we can pick any meaning we want.

Victor Frankl, writing in the aftermath of the Holocaust, put it this way, "A man can live with any how if he has a why." Your "why" could be any number of things as long as you truly and wholeheartedly believe in it.

3. For Bultmann, the resurrection was the ultimate symbol of finding meaning out of meaninglessness. It was a metaphor for meaning rising from the dead meaninglessness of existence. To be raised was to find authentic existence in the midst of a dead world.

You might remember me mentioning Hendrikus Boers at Emory beginning his sermons with, "Let me tell you a myth" before then preaching a perfectly wonderful sermon. Boers had studied under Bultmann at Marburg, and he was echoing him with this line. But "myth" for Bultmann was not the hamfisted myth of David Strauss. A myth for Bultmann and Boers was a meaning-expressing story, a story that expressed a fundamental truth or mystery of life.

So when Bultmann said that the resurrection was a myth, he was saying it was true in a symbolic way. To him, it was the consummate expression of humanity's search for meaning in a meaningless world.

If God ever looks at the hearts of people who's heads are wrong, then we may find a once confused Bultmann in heaven. During the Nazi regime, Bultmann -- like Bonhoeffer -- was part of the confessing church. (Bonhoeffer too was not exactly orthodox, by the way)

There is an unpleasant truth here. Unorthodox thinkers sometimes turn out to be more in tune with the heart of God than some conservative ones. I stayed in the home of Frau Else Michel when I was in Germany in 1995. Her husband, the great conservative Hebrews scholar Otto Michel, was initially in support of the Nazi cause. Only when it got to a certain point did he realize his error. He would spend the rest of his life after the war working toward reconciliation between Jews and Christians.

I wish my German had been better, but I did understand her when she mentioned that Bultmann had once stayed in their home. She smiled as she said with understatement, "Natürlich, er war ganz anders als wir" ("Of course, he was entirely different from us").

There is something about conservatism that regularly falls for the strong man. Kristin Kobes du Mez has at least captured some elements of the equation in Jesus and John Wayne. I suspect that part of the issue is taking some of the anthropomorphic elements of the Old Testament too literally. There is also perhaps some confusion of tradition with faith.

So, there is the paradox of two men. One was orthodox but initially fell for National Socialism. The other was a heretic but saw right through it. I believe this is a story that regularly repeats itself.

4. What convinced me to go ahead and write on Bultmann was the memory that my project for Wang was to evaluate Bultmann's History of the Synoptic Tradition. It was an overly ambitious project (as usual) and I did not succeed at working through it. It was too far beyond me at that time. (Too bad ChatGPT wasn't around -- I could have had it explain the book to me.)

I don't remember much from the book except I think that Bultmann argued that the Transfiguration might have originally have been a resurrection appearance story.

I would overestimate my abilities again in Dr. Wang's Romans 1-8 class. We were all supposed to pick a commentary and follow along as we worked through Romans. I picked Otto Kuss' Romans commentary in German.

What German did I know? Well, I had dabbled with it at home, checking out a German language record over a summer from the Broward County library. And I had taken Dr. O'Malley's German for Reading Knowledge course, which used Jannach as a textbook. Suffice it to say, I was grossly underprepared to read a German commentary on Romans.

It is mostly my fault, but I didn't get much out of that class. I believe David Smith might have also been in that class. One incident I do remember is when a former missionary at the end of class asked Dr. Wang about another possible way of reading a passage. Although he repeated himself more than once, Dr. Wang couldn't quite see what he was saying.

Finally, I think on the third pass at it, Dr. Wang said with a grin, "Oh, oh, oh, oh. I see what you're saying. I'll come back next time with three more reasons why I'm right." He was a good natured soul.

5. In my senior year, I took Steve Seamands' course on Karl Barth (1886-1968). I did not get Barth. I wanted to. I remember asking in class once, "So is Barth saying we have a God shaped vaccum waiting for God?" Dr. Seamands explained that that would be quite the opposite of Barth's approach.

Barth, like Bultmann, was part of neo-orthodoxy. Both, in their own ways, were trying to reinvigorate faith after critical German scholarship had more or less wittled it away. The Liberal Christianity before them had the ethic of Christianity without the orthodoxy.

Bultmann reasserted faith in a non-literal way. Barth did it by way of "dogmatics." To me, his system hung in mid-air without any support. Apologetics was anathema to him. He was in a sense an incredibly verbose fideist -- someone who holds that you just have to believe.

I was nevertheless intrigued by the early Barth of the 20s who focused on the otherness of God and the necessity to know God by analogy. This seemed to me a more humble version of Aquinas. Of course, Barth would then go on to write his immense multivolume Church Dogmatics.

I also would like Barth's emphasis that Jesus is the Word of God (John 1:14). This is of course both biblical and orthodox. The fundamentalism of my circles, however, ran the risk of seeing the Bible as more the word of God than Jesus himself. This may also be one of the reasons why conservatives sometimes lose focus. I have heard a conservative say to stay away from anyone who might say Jesus is the Word of God in comparison to the Bible.

Preaching, then, for Barth, was a third level word of God.

6. Barth was really cool in the 80s and even in the 2000s when I was teaching at IWU. We had a Monday reading group and one semester we read portions from the Dogmatics, with Chris Bounds to lead and others like Keith Drury and Steve Lennox along for the ride.

In the end, Barth didn't speak my language. I think faith should be able to cut the mustard of evidence and reason if it is legitimate. Barth strikes me as a very smart dodger. The post-liberals of that era strike me the same way. They gave up on the evidence game. Or they used Gadamer to cloud the truth in uncertainty. The subconscious goal in each case, it seems to me, is to shield faith from evaluation.

But if faith is true, it should be able to stand up to such scrutiny, it seems to me.

10. The New Covenant (Hebrews 8)

Hebrews time!

1 -- The Setting of Hebrews
2 -- The Cast of Characters
3 -- The Context at Corinth/Ephesus (13:22-25)
4 -- Closing Clues (13:1-19)
5 -- The Main Takeaway (4:14-16; 10:25-31)
6 -- Remember the Good Times (5:11-6:2; 10:32-39)
7 -- The Impossibility of Repentance (6:3-8; 10:26-31)
8 -- The Rhetorical Strategy of Hebrews 
9 -- An Eternal Priest (Hebrews 5, 7)
_________________________________
1. "So," Tertius said, "you will spend some time showing that Jesus is the only effective high priest, the only heavenly high priest. The others were only foreshadowings of the one effective sacrifice for all time."

"Yes," Apollos answered. "As a priest after the order of Melchizedek -- the only one there ever was -- he inaugurates a change of priesthood" (7:12).

"And thus a change of law too," Tertius added.

"Indeed. In fact, he inaugurates the new covenant that Jeremiah foresaw" (Jer. 31:31-34).

"Paul wrote a little about the new covenant in one of his letters to Corinth," Tertius mentioned. "Isn't that an Essene concept?"

"Yes, and thus it was also part of the teaching of John the Baptist. It was a significant part of the Baptist teaching I followed when I was only a follower of the Baptist. Many believers think of what Christ did as inaugurating the new covenant of Jeremiah."

Apollos continued. "I think I will quote that Jeremiah passage extensively. Somewhere about half way through the sermon" (Heb. 8:8-12).

"Is that the passage where God says he will write his law on Israel's hearts?" Tertius asked.

"Yes," Apollos agreed. "It is something God does through his Holy Spirit. We are living in the last days, the days that Jeremiah said were coming. God's people will keep this new covenant."

"I do have a question," Tertius began. "Is the covenant already here or is it only almost here?"

"We are living in a brief middle time," Apollos answered. With Christ having made his one time offering, with him seated as King at the right hand of God, the old covenant is obsolete. It is disappearing" (Heb. 8:13).

"That makes sense," Tertius agreed. "And I suppose the destruction of the temple is a sign of that fact."

"Yes," Apollos answered. "While many are already planning for it to be rebuilt, I'm not sure that God will let that happen. I believe Christ will return a second time (9:28) before those in Jerusalem will have the opportunity to rebuild it."

"So, in a sense, we are in between the ages," Tertius said.

"You might even say we are living in both ages simulaneously," Apollos quipped. "There is the new age that has already begun in heaven, and there is the old age that is near disappearance down here in the created realm."

"That's a powerful image!" Tertius said.

"Yes, we have such a great high priest who sits at the right hand of God (8:1-2). Heaven is the true Holy of Holies. It is the inner sanctum of the true, heavenly tent."

"Do you mean that literally?" Tertius asked.

"Well, I'm not saying that there is an actual temple building in the highest heaven. But you might say that the skies between us and the highest heaven are something like the outer room and outer courts of the heavenly tabernacle."

"And the highest heaven is like the inner sanctum?" Tertius added.

"Yes. It's a valid picture. When God told Moses to build the tabernacle, he designed it to mirror the cosmos. The heavenly sanctuary was the pattern of which the earthly tabernacle was a shadowy illustration" (8:5).

"That's brilliant!" Tertius said.

"It is the deeper meaning of Scripture," Apollos said. "Jesus wouldn't be a priest if he were on earth. But in heaven, he is the truest priest of all" (8:4).

"The Pedagogical Pivot: Educational Transformation in the Era of Generative AI (2023-26)"

I thought I would publish this article created by Notebook LM after looking at about 32 different sources. Call this my first publication in the Journal of AI-Generated Research, which I just made up. But it seemed like this is good information that should be published somewhere:
_______________________

The Pedagogical Pivot: A Comprehensive Analysis of Educational Transformation in the Era of Generative Artificial Intelligence (2023–2026)

The arrival of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) has precipitated what scholars describe as a "quiet but profound transformation" across the global academic landscape.[1] As large language models (LLMs) transition from novel curiosities to ubiquitous cognitive assistants, the foundational tenets of pedagogy—including assessment, instruction, and the development of critical thought—are undergoing an unprecedented epistemological shift.[1, 2] This evolution is characterized by a move from the traditional "Digital Native" paradigm to an "AI-Native" cohort, where learners born after 2015 will engage with an educational environment where machine intelligence is not a tool to be adopted but an embedded condition of human cognitive activity.[3]

Recent research suggests that by late 2023, more than half of college students in the United States were already using AI for assignments, with a staggering 86% of that use going undetected by instructors.[1] This transparency gap has forced educational institutions to move beyond reactive bans and toward a more nuanced, evidence-based integration of AI into pedagogical practices. The following report synthesizes the top 20 most influential articles, frameworks, and reports produced between 2023 and 2026, offering a multidimensional perspective on how to improve pedagogy in this transformative era.

Redefining Teacher Knowledge: The AIA-PCEK and AI-TPACK Frameworks

The rapid integration of AI into classrooms necessitates theoretical scaffolding that extends beyond traditional technology integration models. For decades, the TPACK (Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge) model served as the gold standard for understanding how teachers integrate technology into their practice. However, recent scholarship argues that TPACK's original design was not intended to address the dynamic, adaptive, and ethical complexities introduced by autonomous AI agents.[4]

In response, the AIA-PCEK (Artificial Intelligence Agent – Pedagogical Content Ethical Knowledge) framework has emerged as a comprehensive model that reconceptualizes teacher knowledge.[4] This framework integrates four distinct domains: AI-agent literacy, ethical oversight, adaptive content management, and the cultivation of critical thinking. Unlike previous tools, AIA-PCEK positions the AI system not as a static instrument but as an "autonomous, evolving agent" capable of analyzing learner data and making instructional decisions.[4] This shift recognizes AI as a "pedagogical partner" rather than a mere digital textbook or calculator.

Parallel to this, the "AI-TPACK" models proposed by researchers like Karataş and Ataç (2025) seek to extend the traditional structure by incorporating AI-specific dimensions of data governance and algorithmic bias awareness.[4] These frameworks emphasize that teacher professional development must move beyond improving foundational knowledge and focus on "AI pedagogical knowledge"—the ability to identify specific pedagogical benefits, employ AI-enhanced teaching methods, and design learning environments that foster student autonomy.[5]

Framework Component	Focus Area	Educational Objective
AI-Agent Literacy	Understanding autonomous system behaviors	Enabling effective human-machine collaboration in real-time [4, 6]
Ethical Oversight	Data privacy and algorithmic bias	Ensuring responsible and non-discriminatory AI application [4, 7]
Adaptive Content	Personalization of learning materials	Tailoring instruction to individual student needs and paces [4, 8]
Critical Thinking	Evaluation of AI-generated outputs	Fostering skepticism and verification skills in learners [4, 9]

The Transparency Imperative: The AID Framework and Manuscript Ethics

As AI tools become a standard part of the writing and research process, the question of transparency has become a central pedagogical concern. The "Artificial Intelligence Disclosure" (AID) Framework, introduced by Kari D. Weaver in 2024, represents a pivotal shift in how academic integrity is negotiated.[10, 11] Traditionally, citation practices focused on the ideas posed by an author; however, generative AI can serve a variety of meaningful functions throughout the writing process, including roles as a researcher, editor, critic, or collaborator.[11, 12]

The AID Framework provides a standardized, brief, and targeted disclosure method that is amenable to both human and machine use.[11] It utilizes 14 specific headings to articulate exactly how AI was engaged, ranging from conceptualization and information collection to data analysis and project administration.[11, 12] This approach moves the conversation away from a binary "cheat/not-cheat" mentality and toward a professional standard of disclosure.

AID Heading	Application in Pedagogy	Impact on Academic Integrity
Conceptualization	Framing research questions or hypotheses	Clarifies the origin of the research idea [11, 12]
Information Collection	Pattern recognition in existing literature	Discloses reliance on AI for literature synthesis [11, 13]
Interpretation	Categorizing or manipulating data	Highlights the role of AI in drawing conclusions [11, 12]
Visualization	Creation of graphical representations	Ensures transparency in the creation of visual data [11, 13]
Translation	Cross-language text conversion	Assists multilingual authors in disclosing tool use [11, 12]

Complementing the AID Framework is the seminal work of Buriak et al. (2023) in ACS Nano, which established "Best Practices for Using AI When Writing Scientific Manuscripts".[14, 15] This editorial, reflecting a consensus of over 40 global experts, describes ChatGPT as "merely an efficient language bot" and "just a giant autocomplete machine".[16] The authors caution that creative science depends on human analytical capabilities and experiences that AI cannot replicate. They advocate for an "assisted-driving" approach, where AI provides initial text under strict human supervision, but emphasize that authorship remains a fundamentally human responsibility.[15, 16]

Navigating the Paradoxes of Learning: The Work of Lim et al.

One of the most cited articles in recent years is the 2023 study by Lim et al., which proposed "Four Paradoxes of GenAI in Education".[17] These paradoxes provide a sophisticated lens through which educators can view the disruptive nature of LLMs. The first paradox, "Friend yet Foe," captures the duality of AI's ability to act in a human-like way to fill knowledge gaps while simultaneously providing a path for students to avoid learning entirely.[17, 18] The second paradox, "Capable yet Dependent," highlights that while AI tools are efficient at generating responses, they remain dangerously dependent on the quality of prompts and their prior training data, leading to incorrect information or "hallucinations".[17, 19]

Building on these paradoxes, research by Pallant et al. (2025) utilizes "goal structures" to explain differing student attitudes toward AI.[17] Their findings indicate that higher-level learning occurs when students adopt a "mastery approach," using AI to construct and augment knowledge.[18, 19] Conversely, lower-level learning outcomes result from a "procedural approach," where AI is used merely to complete tasks without cognitive engagement.[18] This suggests that pedagogy must pivot toward fostering a mastery mindset, where students view AI as a scaffold within their "Zone of Proximal Development" rather than a replacement for cognitive effort.[18]

Paradox (Lim et al. 2023)	Core Contradiction	Pedagogical Recommendation
Friend yet Foe	Support vs. Avoidance	Focus on process-oriented assessment [17, 19]
Capable yet Dependent	Efficiency vs. Hallucination	Require cross-verification of AI outputs [17, 18]
Human-like yet Machine	Empathy vs. Algorithm	Emphasize social-emotional learning [17, 20]
Disruptive yet Evolutionary	Innovation vs. Tradition	Balance new tools with foundational skills [17]

Global Competency and Policy: UNESCO and OECD Perspectives

In 2024, UNESCO released its groundbreaking "AI Competency Frameworks for Teachers and Students," reflecting a commitment to a human-centered approach to AI.[7] These frameworks define specific competencies categorized into five domains: AI pedagogy, a human-centered mindset, ethics of AI, AI foundations, and AI for professional development.[7, 21] UNESCO emphasizes that AI should serve as a personal tutor or assistant but must never replace the vital social and emotional role of the educator.[22]

The OECD's "Artificial Intelligence and the Future of Skills" (2025) project further contextualizes these competencies within the shifting labor market.[23, 24] As AI begins to outpace humans in reading, mathematics, and scientific reasoning, the OECD argues that we must rethink which skills to prioritize.[2] Their research identifies human capabilities—such as creativity, critical thinking, and innovation—as essential for individuals to thrive in a digital-centric world.[2] The OECD’s "AI Capability Indicators" provide a technical foundation for understanding where AI is most likely to disrupt traditional human roles, prompting a reconsideration of the school curriculum to emphasize "transversal skills" like collaboration and global competence.[24, 25]

UNESCO Competency Area	Teacher Focus	Student Focus
AI Pedagogy	Innovative teaching methods	Responsible tool interaction [7, 21]
Human-Centered Mindset	Preserving agency & accountability	Understanding societal impact [21, 26]
Ethics of AI	Addressing bias & privacy	Data rights & responsibility [7, 21]
Foundations & Applications	Effective creation & use	Evaluating generated content [21, 26]
Professional Development	Lifelong learning with AI	Building skills for future work [7, 21]

Strategic Implementation: The Harvard and MIT Perspectives

For practitioners, the 2025 articles from Harvard Business Publishing’s "Inspiring Minds" collection offer concrete strategies for the classroom.[27] Nick Potkalitsky proposes the concept of "possibility literacy," which moves beyond technical prompt engineering to cultivate an understanding of AI's inherent contradictions.[27] He recommends designing assignments that privilege the "documentation of in-progress thinking" over final outputs.[28]

Cheryl Strauss Einhorn (2025) identifies five principles to "protect teaching expertise".[27, 29] She notes that AI tools lack the deep understanding of student context and pedagogical goals that come from a teacher’s expertise. To preserve credibility, educators should focus on the "Human Edge"—the connections and deep understanding that AI cannot replicate.[27, 30]

Practical techniques shared by MIT Sloan EdTech include:

• Creating Visual Summaries: Students blend verbal descriptions with AI-generated imagery to create visual aids, fostering creativity and critical thinking as they refine the visuals.[31]

• AI-Powered Practice Quizzes: Using prompts from Ethan and Lilach Mollick to create "highly diagnostic" low-stakes tests that strengthen memory retention through retrieval practice.[31]

• The "Try-First" Principle: Students are encouraged to form their own conclusions before consulting AI, ensuring that the technology pushes rather than replaces their thinking.[32]

The Higher Education Landscape: EDUCAUSE Top 10 for 2026

The "2026 EDUCAUSE Top 10" report provides a decidedly human-centric outlook for technology leaders.[30, 33] The report identifies the "Human Edge of AI" as its second most critical issue, emphasizing the empowerment of students, faculty, and staff to engage with AI tools "critically, creatively, and safely".[30, 34] This is not seen as a "silver-bullet solution" but as a connection-building exercise between institutional leaders and the people they serve.[33]

Issue #7, "Technology Literacy for the Future Workforce," specifically calls for discipline-specific technology training.[30] Technology leaders are working to embed AI literacy into the "holistic student experience" rather than treating it as an isolated technical skill.[30] Furthermore, the report warns of the "limits of predictive models," noting that while data can triangulate a student's journey, it often misses the emotional and social dimensions that define the human learning experience.[30]

EDUCAUSE 2026 Issue	Primary Focus	Pedagogical Implication
#2: The Human Edge of AI	Empowering critical engagement	Shift from policing to creative improvisation [30, 34]
#5: Knowledge Management	Mitigating AI risks through governance	Protecting institutional data and integrity [30, 35]
#7: Technology Literacy	Discipline-specific training	Ensuring workforce readiness in all fields [30, 36]
#9: AI-Enabled Efficiencies	Automating administrative tasks	Freeing faculty time for student mentorship [30, 37]
#10: Decision-Maker Literacy	Using data for sound judgment	Modeling thoughtful analysis for students [30, 38]

Subject-Specific Case Studies: Creative Arts and Professional Education

The integration of AI is not uniform across disciplines. A 2025 study on digital photography education in higher education found that AI-supported models can enhance "learning efficiency" but also raise concerns about standardizing expression and constraining originality.[39] In this creative context, AI tools assist students in adjusting technical parameters like lighting and framing, but the instructor remains essential for fostering "creative autonomy".[39]

In professional business education, Weinstein et al. (2025) describe a decision-making framework for analyzing cases with AI.[27] They argue that if structured correctly, AI helps students arrive at stronger decisions and engage more deeply in class discussions, provided they are taught to "still learn the right skills" alongside the tool.[27] These studies underscore the importance of integrating AI within a sound pedagogical framework rather than treating it as a plug-and-play solution.[39]

Psychological and Affective Dimensions: "AI Guilt" and Agency

Emerging research by Cecilia Ka Yuk Chan (2024) explores the phenomenon of "AI Guilt" among students.[17, 40] This concept refers to the psychological tension students feel when using AI in their homework, often fearing that it compromises their authentic learning or intellectual contribution.[40] Chan and Tsi (2024) also examined whether generative AI will replace teachers, finding that both students and faculty value the "social and emotional skills" of human educators as irreplaceable components of the learning process.[22, 40]

This affective dimension is further explored in the Microsoft 2025 Report, which notes that while AI can reduce task time by 40%, it can also diminish a student’s perception that the work is truly their own.[41] This creates a "novel tension" between learning efficiency and the intrinsic value of learning. To resolve this, educators are encouraged to use AI as a "catalyst for dialogue" rather than a one-to-one interaction between a student and a computer.[41]

Synthesizing Outcomes: The Microsoft and Frontiers Systematic Reviews

Quantitative evidence of AI's impact is beginning to materialize. The "2025 AI in Education: A Microsoft Special Report" highlights that AI adoption in education is the highest of any industry, with 86% of organizations reporting generative AI use.[41] Significant improvements in assessments have been observed; for instance, a randomized trial in Nigeria using Microsoft Copilot for English language learning showed an improvement of 0.31 standard deviation (0.31σ) in student performance.[41]

However, the "Frontiers in Education" (2025) systematic review of 30 papers on K-12 AI use indicates that research remains concentrated in high school settings, with a notable lack of evidence for early childhood education.[42] The review notes that "psychological variables" are the primary measures used to gauge learning outcomes, and while GenAI can enhance student engagement, it also raises significant concerns about the "erosion of critical thinking" and "misinformation".[42, 43]

Quantitative Insight (2025)	Metric / Outcome	Source
Grade Improvement	10% increase for AI users in exams	[41]
Adoption Rate	86% of education organizations use GenAI	[41]
Performance Gain	0.31 standard deviation in English learning	[41]
Student Usage	50%+ students use AI; 86% go undetected	[1]
Literacy Gap	<50% of educators feel they "know a lot" about AI	[41]

Conclusion: A Vision for AI-Augmented Pedagogy

The research and reports of the last three years converge on a singular conclusion: improving pedagogy in the age of AI requires a fundamental move away from "binary thinking"—viewing AI as either a silver bullet or an existential threat.[20] Instead, the most effective pedagogical strategies are those that embrace "augmented intelligence," combining the computational power of machines with the unique creativity and empathy of human instructors.[44]

Actionable priorities for educational institutions include:

1. Embracing Mastery-Oriented Assessment: Shifting toward "process-oriented" teaching that evaluates the documentation of thinking and decision-making rather than just the final product.[5, 28]

2. Institutionalizing Algorithmic Literacy: Ensuring that students and faculty understand how AI models collect and manipulate data, and the inherent risks of bias and hallucination.[21, 45]

3. Promoting Standardized Disclosure: Adopting frameworks like the AID Framework to create a transparent environment where AI use is discussed openly as part of professional development.[11, 12]

4. Investing in Teacher Training: Moving beyond technical skills to "AI pedagogical knowledge," empowering educators to integrate AI as a cognitive scaffold while protecting their domain expertise.[5, 27]

5. Addressing Equity and the AI Divide: Prioritizing sustainable digital infrastructure and culturally relevant AI models to ensure that the benefits of this technology do not exacerbate existing social inequalities.[20, 46]

Ultimately, the future of pedagogy will be determined not just in corporate labs, but in the "classrooms, villages, and communities" where teachers and students negotiate the boundaries of this new landscape.[20] By centering human agency, ethics, and critical thought, the education sector can ensure that AI serves as a powerful assistant that strengthens, rather than diminishes, the human process of learning.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. The quiet transformation of higher education in the AI era - PMC, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12438950/

2. Future of education and skills - OECD, https://www.oecd.org/en/topics/future-of-education-and-skills.html

3. ChatBot: AI Native vs. Digital Native? | Educational Technology and Change Journal, https://etcjournal.com/2025/07/16/chatbot-ai-native-vs-digital-native/

4. Full article: 'AIA-PCEK': A new framework for teaching with AI, https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/2331186X.2025.2563171

5. Professional Development for Teachers in the Age of AI - European Schoolnet, http://www.eun.org/documents/411753/11183389/EUNA-Thematic-Seminar-Report-V5.pdf/b16bf795-b147-43ac-9f58-4dd1249b5e48

6. (PDF) AI's role in transforming learning environments: a review of collaborative approaches and innovations - ResearchGate, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/390370126_AI's_role_in_transforming_learning_environments_a_review_of_collaborative_approaches_and_innovations

7. UNESCO's AI Competency Frameworks: Equipping Educators and Students for the Age of AI - AI4edu, https://ai4edu.eu/2024/11/12/unescos-ai-competency-frameworks-equipping-educators-and-students-for-the-age-of-ai/

8. Use of AI in Schools [25 Case Studies] [2025] - DigitalDefynd Education, https://digitaldefynd.com/IQ/ai-in-schools-case-studies/

9. AI & Academic Writing | Writing@CWRU | Case Western Reserve University, https://case.edu/writing/resources/ai-academic-writing

10. the-artificial-intelligence-disclosure-aid-framework-an-introduction - University of Warwick, https://warwick.ac.uk/fac/cross_fac/eduport/edufund/projects/yang/projects/the-artificial-intelligence-disclosure-aid-framework-an-introduction/

11. The Artificial Intelligence Disclosure (AID) Framework: An Introduction | Weaver, https://crln.acrl.org/index.php/crlnews/article/view/26548/34482

12. The Artificial Intelligence Disclosure (AID) Framework: An Introduction - arXiv, https://arxiv.org/pdf/2408.01904?

13. Transparent, Detailed, Ethical – An Introduction to the Artificial Intelligence Disclosure (AID) Framework | BCcampus, https://bccampus.ca/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/2025-02-25-RSS-2-AID-Framework-Slides.pdf

    14. Research Articles on AI in Education / Tools for researchers Research Articles - PUPP, https://pupp.uqo.ca/en/14-research-articles-ai-education-tools-research-articles/

14. [PDF] Best Practices for Using AI When Writing Scientific Manuscripts. | Semantic Scholar, https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Best-Practices-for-Using-AI-When-Writing-Scientific-Buriak-Akinwande/668cb013be90a16ebb3ac8ce8a763dadc1935fbd

15. Best Practices for Using AI When Writing Scientific Manuscripts | ACS Nano, https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acsnano.3c01544

16. Full article: Mastering knowledge: the impact of generative AI on student learning outcomes, https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/03075079.2025.2487570

17. Mastering knowledge: the impact of generative AI on student learning outcomes - Taylor & Francis, https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/03075079.2025.2487570

18. ACU Research Bank - Mastering knowledge : The impact of generative AI on student learning outcomes, https://acuresearchbank.acu.edu.au/server/api/core/bitstreams/ce85d7cd-323c-4953-bfd8-984d1fe1aece/content

19. AI and the future of education: disruptions, dilemmas and directions - UNESCO, https://www.unesco.org/en/articles/ai-and-future-education-disruptions-dilemmas-and-directions-0

20. Artificial intelligence in education | UNESCO, https://www.unesco.org/en/digital-education/artificial-intelligence

21. Artificial intelligence in education: UNESCO advances key competencies, https://www.unesco.org/en/articles/artificial-intelligence-education-unesco-advances-key-competencies-teachers-and-learners

22. Artificial intelligence and education and skills | OECD, https://www.oecd.org/en/topics/artificial-intelligence-and-education-and-skills.html

23. Artificial Intelligence and the Future of Skills - OECD, https://www.oecd.org/en/about/projects/artificial-intelligence-and-future-of-skills.html

24. AI and the Future of Skills, Volume 1 | OECD, https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/ai-and-the-future-of-skills-volume-1_5ee71f34-en.html

25. AI competencies for teachers and students - UNESCO, https://articles.unesco.org/sites/default/files/medias/fichiers/2025/04/ai-competencies-asia-pacific-seminar-G77-china-cn_1.pdf

26. Our Top Gen AI Articles of 2025 | Harvard Business Impact Education, https://hbsp.harvard.edu/inspiring-minds/top-gen-ai-articles-2025

27. AI Should Push, Not Replace, Students' Thinking | Harvard Business Impact Education, https://hbsp.harvard.edu/inspiring-minds/ai-student-thinking-skills

28. Artificial Intelligence | Harvard Business Impact Education, https://hbsp.harvard.edu/inspiring-minds/categories/artificial-intelligence

29. 2026 EDUCAUSE Top 10: Making Connections, https://er.educause.edu/articles/2025/10/2026-educause-top-10-making-connections

30. Practical Strategies for Teaching with AI - MIT Sloan Teaching & Learning Technologies, https://mitsloanedtech.mit.edu/ai/teach/practical-strategies-for-teaching-with-ai/

31. 5 Sample Classroom AI Policies | Harvard Business Impact Education, https://hbsp.harvard.edu/inspiring-minds/sample-classroom-ai-policies

32. 2026 EDUCAUSE Top 10, https://www.educause.edu/research-and-publications/research/top-10-it-issues-technologies-and-trends/2026

33. Looking at the 2026 EDUCAUSE Top 10 through a library lens - Taylor & Francis Online, https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/07317131.2025.2599621

34. Ethics | EDUCAUSE Library, https://library.educause.edu/topics/leadership-and-management/ethics

35. Looking at the 2026 EDUCAUSE Top 10 through a library lens - Taylor & Francis Online, https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/07317131.2025.2599621

36. 2026 EDUCAUSE Top 10 #9: AI-Enabled Efficiencies and Growth, https://er.educause.edu/articles/2025/10/2026-educause-top-10-9-ai-enabled-efficiencies-and-growth

37. Data Literacy - EDUCAUSE Library, https://library.educause.edu/topics/administrative-and-business-services/data-literacy

38. Integrating AI into instructional design: A case study on digital photography education in higher education, https://www.cedtech.net/download/integrating-ai-into-instructional-design-a-case-study-on-digital-photography-education-in-higher-16433.pdf

39. AI in High School Education Report, https://www.bowdoin.edu/hastings-ai-initiative/resources/initiative-created-resources/ai-in-high-school-education-report.pdf

40. 2025 AI in Education: A Microsoft Special Report, https://cdn-dynmedia-1.microsoft.com/is/content/microsoftcorp/microsoft/bade/documents/products-and-services/en-us/education/2025-Microsoft-AI-in-Education-Report.pdf

41. Generative AI use in K-12 education: a systematic review - Frontiers, https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/education/articles/10.3389/feduc.2025.1647573/full

42. ChatGPT-5 in Secondary Education: A Mixed-Methods Analysis of Student Attitudes, AI Anxiety, and Hallucination-Aware Use Tryfon - arXiv, https://www.arxiv.org/pdf/2512.04109

43. for Teachers - Opetushallitus, https://www.oph.fi/sites/default/files/documents/AI_Guide_for_Teachers_Digital_Information_Literacy.pdf

44. UK ADVANCE 2025 Guidelines and Recommendations - University of Kentucky, https://advance.uky.edu/sites/default/files/2025-06/ukadvance-instructional-guidelines-2025-approved.pdf

45. Exploring Artificial Intelligence in Inclusive Education: A Systematic ..., https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3417/15/23/12624

Generated by Notebook LM