Teachers at convenings said the three AI approaches are fluid rather than static, with movement across approaches as experience grows¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · qualitativer3·q2
Currency · newest study 2024 · checked against its sources 2026-10-20 (automated, 1 of 1 entry) · not reviewed by a person
Subclaims¶
Reading the evidence codes
q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r
the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.
This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.
q2 i? Convening teachers agreed the approaches were accurate but not static: a teacher could take one approach one day and another the next, or progress across approaches over time. → Hillary Greene Nolan 2024
Evidence¶
Hillary Greene Nolan 2024¶
Hillary Greene Nolan, Ph.D, Merijke Coenraad, Ph.D, Viki Young, Ph.D. (2024). Teaching Partner, Grading Assistant, Substitute Teacher: Three Ways Teachers Positioned an Artificial Intelligence Tool in Writing Instruction. Digital Promise, Center for Inclusive Innovation. https://digitalpromise.dspacedirect.org/items/4f2d86a3-9b66-4538-a5ad-977bb8fbacf7 doi:10.51388/20.500.12265/226
q2 · i? · qualitative · r3
Member-checking at teacher convenings following the 2021–22 implementation: an in-person convening in June 2022 and virtual convenings in November and December 2022. Of 10 November survey respondents, four self-identified as teaching partner, six as grading assistant, and zero as substitute teacher; one described moving from substitute-leaning toward partner over two years.
"all teachers who attended our convenings felt that the approaches were not static, but rather that a teacher could approach AI as an assistant one day and a partner the next, or begin as a substitute and progress to assistant and partner with experience."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Trust in AI varied by positioning: partners saw bias and assigned their own grades, while substitutes trusted AI scores as actual grades — related
- The focus of teacher-student interactions differed by AI positioning: learning for partners, score-increasing for assistants, completion for substitutes — related
- Teachers who positioned AI as a partner remained instructional leaders, weaving the tool into rich instruction and using score data to decide what to re-teach — related
- Among 24 Topeka teachers, half positioned the AI as a teaching partner, 29% as a grading assistant, and 21% as a substitute teacher — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
ai-positioning-approaches-are-fluid |
title |
Teachers at convenings said the three AI approaches are fluid rather than static, with movement across approaches as experience grows |
description |
Teachers at convenings said the three AI approaches are fluid rather than static, with movement across approaches as experience grows |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
weak |
newest_evidence |
2024 |
source_checked |
2026-10-20 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-09 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — hillary-greene-nolan-2024 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.