Author Information
Adma Gama-Krummel, University of Rochester, United StatesAbstract
The rapid integration of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) into higher education has generated extensive research on technological adoption, academic integrity, and pedagogical innovation. Less attention has been given to how GenAI challenges the professional commitments through which faculty interpret responsible teaching. This conceptual literature review examined recurring professional tensions in faculty engagement with GenAI and developed a typology of faculty professional ethos. Following the screening of 357 records, 52 publications available online by December 31, 2025, were retained for conceptual synthesis; 41 provided direct evidence for four tensions: efficiency and scalability versus professional judgment and accountability; innovation and experimentation versus integrity, reliability, and governance; instructional continuity versus pedagogical redesign; and technological augmentation versus the human and relational meaning of teaching. The tensions were organized along two dimensions: generative possibility versus protective responsibility and operational practice versus pedagogical meaning and relationships. Their intersection produced four orientations: the Instrumental Optimizer, Ethical Gatekeeper, Pedagogical Re-Designer, and Critical Humanist. These orientations are overlapping, context-sensitive constructs rather than fixed faculty types or developmental stages. By shifting attention from whether faculty adopt GenAI to how they negotiate responsibility, the typology offers a framework for faculty development, institutional policy, and empirical research on GenAI-mediated teaching.
Paper Information
Conference: ECE2026Stream: Teaching Experiences
This paper is part of the ECE2026 Conference Proceedings (View)
Full Paper
View / Download the full paper in a new tab/window
Comments
Powered by WP LinkPress