Use findings on instructor power relations to inform professional development for responding to Generative AI¶

Strategy · All strategies
Evidence · 1 claim (1 for) · 1 study (1 qualitative), q2 · 0 of 1 report an effect size · 1 claim rests on one study

Description¶

The article positions its findings as input for instructor professional development around Generative AI. The abstract states that "Findings of this study can inform instructors' professional development and strategies for responding to the trend of Generative AI in teaching practices." Professional development designed from these findings would address the four power centers and support both restrictive and integrative instructional responses.

Design Implications¶

Context¶

Requirements¶

• Professional development programs for college instructors facing Generative AI in teaching

Constraints¶

• Grounded in a case study of writing instructors; transfer to other settings is not established in the available text

Target Learners¶

• College instructors
• Professional development facilitators

Target Learning Goals¶

• Responding to Generative AI in teaching practices

Claims¶

• College instructors perceive Generative AI through power relations with four distinct centers [+W]

Related Strategies¶

• Embed AI policy literacy, peer-led communities of practice, and shared AI resources into professional development
• Institutions should respond to GenAI with clear governance frameworks and structured professional training programs for staff.
• Use the DOT Framework's Empathize and Test/Feedback stages as practical checklists, and build professional learning communities around shared prompting and critique practices
• Shift teacher professional development from information-based training to experience-based AI design activities in sustainability contexts

Examples¶

-

Key Sources¶

• Yanhong Zuo, Xiatinghan Xu, Leigh Ann Dunning. (2026). “Will AI steal my glory?”: Power relations perceived by college instructors when grappling with Generative AI. Journal of Applied Learning and Teaching, 9(1), 31-50. https://doi.org/10.37074/jalt.2026.9.1.8