بازاندیشی درباره نقش معلم: از معمار آموزش تا همکاری واقع بینانه با هوش مصنوعی

نوع مقاله : مقاله علمی- پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشیار گروه فلسفه تعلیم و تربیت،‌ دانشگاه خوارزمی،‌ تهران،‌ ایران

2 استادیار گروه آموزش علوم تربیتی،‌ دانشگاه فرهنگیان،‌ تهران،‌ ایران

چکیده

هدف پژوهش حاضر بازاندیشی درباره نقش معلم: از معمار آموزش تا همکاری واقع بینانه با هوش‌مصنوعی می‌باشد. برای دستیابی به این هدف از رویکردی فلسفی و روش پژوهش فراتحلیل کیفی استفاده شده‌است. یافته‌های پژوهش نشان از آن دارد که هوش‌مصنوعی مولد با توانایی ترکیب داده‌های گسترده و تولید محتوا،‌ برنامه‌درسی شخصی‌سازی‌شده و تعاملی که ارائه می‌دهد،‌ اقتدار رایج و معمول معلم را دگرگون می‌کند. در این مقاله و با ارائه دلایل و شواهد مربوطه،‌ این دگرگونی در قالب سه گونه بحران دسته‌بندی شده‌است: ۱) بحران در نقش متصدی بازنمایی دانش؛ ۲) بحران در معماری برنامه‌درسی و ۳) بحران تسهیلگری یادگیری. این دگرگونی‌ها از طرفی افق‌هایی برای بهبود کیفیت آموزش و از سویی دیگر متزلزل کردن جایگاه معلم در آموزش را به دنبال دارد. در بخش دوم با ارائه نقدهایی به رویکرد تسهیلگرانه فنی به تدریس نکته‌هایی در راستای احیای مشروعیت از دست رفته معلم ارائه شده‌است. در نتیجه‌گیری می‌توان گفت معلمان امروزی که به لطف همکاری با هوش‌مصنوعی مولد از وظایف فنی پیشین مانند نگارش طرح درس،‌ و بازنمایی دانش بی‌نیاز شده‌اند،‌ بر پرورش مهارت‌های مربوط به خودشناسی و خودشدن و نیز عاطفی-اجتماعی فراگیران تمرکز می‌کنند. همچنین از نقش‌های جدید معلم «مربی انتقادی» برای ارزیابی خروجی‌های سوگیرانه هوش‌مصنوعی می‌باشد.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات


عنوان مقاله [English]

Rethinking the Role of the Teacher: From Architect of Education to Realistic Collaboration with Artificial Intelligence

نویسندگان [English]

  • Saeid Zarghami-Hamrah 1
  • Hamid Ahmadi-Hedayat 2
1 Associate Professor, Department of Philosophy of Education, Kharazmi University, Tehran, Iran.
2 Assistant Professor, Department of Educational Sciences, Farhangian University, Tehran, Iran
چکیده [English]

The purpose of this study is to re-examine the role of the teacher, tracing its evolution from an "architect of instruction" to a "realistic collaborator" with AI. To achieve this objective, the research employs a philosophical approach and a qualitative meta-analysis methodology. The findings indicate that generative AI—with its capacity to synthesize vast data, generate content, and deliver personalized, interactive curricula—fundamentally transforms the teacher's conventional authority. Drawing on relevant evidence, this paper frames this transformation in terms of three distinct crises: 1) a crisis in the teacher's role as the custodian of knowledge representation, 2) a crisis in curriculum architecture, and 3) a crisis in the facilitation of learning. These transformations simultaneously present new horizons for enhancing educational quality while also threatening to destabilize the teacher's position in the educational landscape. The second part of the paper critiques the "technical facilitator" model of teaching and proposes arguments for restoring the teacher's diminished professional legitimacy. In conclusion, it is argued that today's educators, freed from former technical duties like lesson planning and knowledge representation through their collaboration with generative AI, can now focus on cultivating learners' skills in self-awareness, self-actualization, and social-emotional development. Furthermore, a new role for the teacher emerges as a "critical coach," tasked with evaluating the biased outputs of AI.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Generative Artificial Intelligence
  • Educational Architecture
  • Teacher’s Role
احمدی هدایت، حمید و رسولی،‌ بهنام. (1403). پساپدیدارشناسی همکاری انسان و هوش مصنوعی در طراحی آموزشی. علوم تربیتی, 32(2)،‌ (در نوبت چاپ). https://doi.org/10.22055/edus.2025.48409.3688
بازرگان هرندی،‌ عباس. (1391). مقدمه‌ای بر روش‌های تحقیق کیفی و آمیخته: رویکردهای متداول در علوم رفتاری. تهران،‌ انتشارات دیدار.
ضرغامی-همراه،‌ سعید،‌ و احمدی-هدایت،‌ حمید. (1391). نگاهی فلسفی به آموزش مجازی. تهران،‌ انتشارات دانشگاه خوارزمی.
عطاران،‌ محمد. (۱۳۹۵). پژوهش روایی: اصول و مراحل. تهران، انتشارات دانشگاه فرهنگیان.
Ahmadi-Hedayat, H. & Rasouli, B. (2025). Post-phenomenology of Human-AI Collaboration in Instructional design. Journal of Educational Sciences, 32(2), (in Persian) https://doi.org/10.22055/edus.2025.48409.3688
Attaran, M. (2016). Narrative research: Principles and stages. Tehran, Farhangian University Press. (in Persian)
Baker, R. S. & Hawn, A. (2021). Algorithmic bias in education. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 32 (4), 1052–1092. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-021-00285-9‌
Bazargan, A. (2012). An introduction to qualitative and mixed research methods: Common approaches in behavioral sciences. Tehran, Didar Publications. (in Persian)
Biesta, G. (2008). Good education in an age of measurement: on the need to reconnect with the question of purpose in education. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 21(1), 33–46. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-008-9064-9
Bouckaert, M. & Kools, Q. (2018). Teacher educators as curriculum developers: exploration of a professional role. European Journal of Teacher Education, 41(1), 32-49.
Bowen, G. A. (2009). Document Analysis as a Qualitative Research Method. Qualitative Research Journal, 9(2), 27-40.
Carr, W. (1998). What is educational practice? In Philosophy of education: major themes in the analytic tradition, Edited by P. White, and P. Hirst, 167-183. New York, Routledge.
Cope, B. & Kalantzis, M. (2020). Making Sense: Reference, Agency and Structure in a Grammar of Multimodal Meaning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316459645
Cope, B. & Kalantzis, M. (2023). A Multimodal Grammar of Artificial Intelligence: Measuring the Gains and Losses in Generative AI. Multimodality and Society. https://doi.org/10.1177/26349795231221699
Cope, B. & Kalantzis, M (2024). On Cyber-Social Learning: A Critique of Artificial Intelligence in Education. In D. Kourkoulou et al. (eds.), Trust and Inclusion in AI-Mediated Education, Postdigital Science and Education, Springer:
Dewey, J. (1933). How We Think: A Restatement of the Relation of Reflective Thinking to the Educative Process.
Ennis, R. H. (1987). A taxonomy of critical thinking dispositions and abilities. In S. F. Norris (Ed.), The Third International Conference on Thinking.
Heidegger, M. (1977). The Question Concerning Technology: in the Question Concerning Technology & other Essays, Translated by William Lovitt. New York: Harper Torch Books‌
Hodges, C. B. & Kirschner, P. A. (2024). Innovation of instructional design and assessment in the age of generative artificial intelligence. TechTrends, 68(1), 195-199. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-023-00926-x
Holmes, W. & Porayska-Pomsta, K. (Eds.). (2023). The Ethics of Artificial Intelligence in Education: Practices, Challenges, and Debates (1st ed.). Routledge.
Holmes, W. & Bialik, M. & Fadel, C. (2019). Artificial intelligence in education. Center for Curriculum Redesign.‌
Hrastinski, S. & Olofsson, A. D., Arkenback, C., Ekström, S., Ericsson, E., Fransson, G., … Utterberg, M. (2019). Critical Imaginaries and Reflections on Artificial Intelligence and Robots in Postdigital K-12 Education. Postdigital Science and Education, 1(2), 427445. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42438-019-00046-x
Ihde, D. (2002). Bodies in technology. Minnesota: The University of Minnesota Press.
Illich, I. (1971). Deschooling Society. London: Marion Boyars Publishers Ltd.
Kasneci, E., Seßler, K., Küchemann, S., Bannert, M., Dementieva, D., Fischer, F., ... & Kasneci, G. (2023). ChatGPT for good? On opportunities and challenges of large language models for education. Learning and individual differences, 103, 102274.
Laurence, S. & Margolis, E. (1999). Concepts and Cognitive Science. In E. Margolis & S. Laurence (Eds.), Concepts: Core Readings (pp. 3-81). MIT Press.
Lipman, M. (1988). Thinking in Education. Cambridge University Press.
Luckin, R., Holmes, W., Griffiths, M., & Forcier, L. B. (2016). Intelligence unleashed: An argument for AI in education. Pearson.‌
Martin‐Kniep, G. O. & Uhrmacher, P. B. (1992). Teachers as curriculum developers. Journal of curriculum studies, 24(3), 261-271.
McCarthy, J., Minsky, M. L., Rochester, N., & Shannon, C. E. (1955). A proposal for the Dartmouth summer research project on artificial intelligence. AI Magazine, 27(4), 12–14.
Mehta, K. J., Miletich, I. & Detyna, M. (2021). Content-specific differences in Padlet perception for collaborative learning amongst undergraduate students. Res. Learn. Technol. 29: 2551. https://doi.org/10.25304/rlt.v29.2551
Musk, E. & Neuralink. (2019). An Integrated Brain-Machine Interface Platform with Thousands of Channels. Journal of medical Internet research, 21(10), e16194. https://doi.org/10.2196/16194
Parsons, B. & Curry, J. H. (2024). Can ChatGPT pass graduate-level instructional design assignments? Potential implications of artificial intelligence in education and a call to action. TechTrends, 68(1), 67-78. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-023-00912-3
Paul, R. & Elder, L. (2006). The Miniature Guide to Critical Thinking Concepts and Tools. Tehran, Foundation for Critical Thinking.
Perez, S. (18 September 2015). Padlet Raises $1.2 Million for Its Easy-To-Use, Collaborative Website Builder. TechCrunch. Retrieved 3 November 2020. https://techcrunch.com/2015/09/18/padlet-raises-1-2-million-for-its-easy-to-use-collaborative-website-builder/
Rosnida, A. D. & Zainor, Z. (2018). Padlet as an educational tool: pedagogical considerations and lessons learnt. in Proceedings of the 10th international conference on education technology and computers (ICETC '18). pp. 156–162. Tehran, Association for Computing Machinery.
Selwyn, N. (2022). Education and technology: Key issues and debates (3rd ed.). Bloomsbury.‌
Shawer, S. F. (2010). Classroom-level curriculum development: EFL teachers as curriculum-developers, curriculum-makers and curriculum-transmitters. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26(2), 173-184.
Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1–22.
Toulmin, S. E. (2003). The Uses of Argument. Cambridge University Press.
VanLehn, K. (2011). The relative effectiveness of human tutoring, intelligent tutoring systems, and other tutoring systems. Educational Psychologist, 46(4), 197–221.‌
Zarghami-Hamrah, S. & de Vries, M. (2018). Ubiquitous learning and massive communication in MOOCs: Revisiting the role of teaching as a praxis, Ethics and Education, 13(3), 370-384
Zarghami-Hamrah, S. & Ahmadi-Hedayat, H. (2022). A philosophical view on the virtual education. Tehran, Kharazmi University Press. (in Persian)
CAPTCHA Image