When integrating GenAI, deliberately weigh control-oriented structures against designs that promote learner agency and creativity¶

Strategy · All strategies
Evidence · no claims cited

Description¶

Drawing on the historical tension the article traces between Anderson's structured tutoring systems and Papert's constructionist approach, this strategy directs integration decisions toward the agency end of the spectrum. The article argues that decision-making will determine whether these technologies "reinforce traditional structures or promote greater learner agency and creativity." Practitioners should explicitly evaluate whether a proposed GenAI use increases learner agency and creativity or deepens control.

Design Implications¶

Context¶

Requirements¶

• Integration decisions should be informed by the historical patterns the article documents, particularly the control-versus-autonomy tension

Constraints¶

• The article presents this as a forward-looking argument rather than a validated implementation procedure

Target Learners¶

• educators and instructional designers adopting generative AI tools

Target Learning Goals¶

• fostering learner agency and creative learning with AI technologies

Related Strategies¶

• Classify and design AI teaching tools by governance mechanism, using transferable design questions rather than generic tool categories
• Learning by generating games with LLMs, supported by prompting pedagogy

Examples¶

-

Key Sources¶

• Mishra, P., Henriksen, D., Woo, L. J., & Oster, N. (2025). Control vs. Agency: Exploring the History of AI in Education. TechTrends. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-025-01064-2