Research on the Crisis of Teacher Subjectivity Induced by Generative Artificial Intelligence and Countermeasures: A Humanistic Educational Philosophy Perspective

DOI: https://doi.org/10.62517/jhet.202515337

Author(s)

Wei Yuan

Affiliation(s)

School of Management, Guangdong Ocean University, Zhanjiang, Guangdong, China

Abstract

The rapid advancement of generative artificial intelligence has profoundly reshaped the educational ecosystem, and its impact on teacher subjectivity has emerged as a core issue concerning the essence of education. From the perspective of humanistic educational philosophy, this study explores the deep-seated influence of technological transformation on teachers’ instructional practices, educational values, and role positioning. It further reveals a triple crisis in teacher subjectivity under the pervasive influence of generative artificial intelligence: cognitive conservatism, manifesting as alienation and disconnection when teachers confront disruptive technologies; technological subservience, leading to the erosion of ethical care and humanistic spirit in the educational process; and relational fractures, resulting in the interruption and severance of emotional bonds and deep interactions between teachers and students. In response, countermeasures guided by humanistic principles are proposed: advocating for a human-machine symbiosis concept and promoting lifelong learning in teachers’ professional skills to master technology; returning to the authentic goals of education and reaffirming the holistic education concept to break free from technological subservience; and reshaping teacher-student interaction models by strengthening emotional engagement and humanistic care within knowledge transmission. This provides a theoretical reference and practical pathways for resolving the crisis of teacher subjectivity in the era of artificial intelligence, aiding education in returning to its value essence of “human-centeredness”.

Keywords

Generative Artificial Intelligence; ChatGPT; Humanistic Education; Crisis of Teacher Subjectivity

References

[1] DeCarvalho R J. The humanistic paradigm in education. The Humanistic Psychologist, 1991, 19(1): 88-104. [2] Crissman P. The psychology of John Dewey. Psychological Review, 1942, 49(5): 441. [3] Maslow A H. Maslow on management. John Wiley & Sons, 1998: 43-56. [4] Rogers C R. Freedom to learn: A view of what education might become[M]. Columbus: Charles E. Merrill, 1969: 212-245. [5] Webster F. Theories of the information society. Routledge, 2014: 306-340. [6] Rodrigues Barbosa, Glívia Angélica, et al. Human-Computer Integration as an Extension of Interaction: Understanding Its State-of-the-Art and the Next Challenges. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 2023, 2(18): 1-20. [7] Mitchell L. D., Parlamis J. D., & Claiborne S. A. Claiborne. Overcoming faculty avoidance of online education: From resistance to support to active participation. Journal of Management Education, 2015, 39(3): 350-371. [8] Fromm E. An introduction to theories of personality. Psychology Press, 2014: 121-135. [9] Kupfer A. Symbolic violence: Education as concealed power. Power and education: Contexts of oppression and opportunity, 2015: 26-40. [10] Nordlöf C,Hallström J, and Höst G E. Self-efficacy or context dependency?: Exploring teachers’perceptions of and attitudes towards technology education. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 2019, 29(1): 123-141. [11] ZOU Hongjun. Will ChatGPT Replace Human Teachers?. Chongqing Higher Education Research, 2023, 11(3): 19-21. [12] Sahin I. Detailed review of Rogers’ diffusion of innovations theory and educational technology-related studies based on Rogers’ theory. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology-TOJET, 2006, 5(2): 4-23. [13] KANG Bo, GUO Hui, SUN Zhihui, et al. Innovative Exploration of Informatization Teaching Evaluation in the Digital Intelligence Era. Printing and Digital Media Technology Research, 2023(4): 195-202, 236. [14] WEN Xiaonian. Examining the Ideological Risks of ChatGPT. Journal of Northwest Minzu University (Philosophy and Social Sciences Edition), 2023(4): 99-108. [15] LI Yi, WANG Meng. Research on the Dilemmas and Countermeasures of Intellectual Property Protection from the Perspective of ChatGPT: Based on the Perspective of Chengdu-Chongqing Governance Entities Confirming Rights to ChatGPT Data Products. Journal of Chongqing University of Technology, 2023, 37(12): 129-136. [16] ZHU Mengyao, LI Xinghua. Research on Security Threats of ChatGPT. Journal of Information Security Research, 2023, 9(6): 533-542. [17] SHANG Junjie. ChatGPT and Higher Education Transformation: Value, Impact, and Future Development. Chongqing Higher Education Research, 2023, 11(3): 6-10. [18] XU Yingjin. “The They,” “Bad Faith,” and Chat Software. Social Science Front, 2023, 334(4): 47-56. [19] GUO Shunfeng, LI Guang, ZOU Hongjun. The Legitimacy Crisis of “Learning from Human Teachers” Triggered by ChatGPT and Its Response: Based on the Perspective of Critical Theory of Technology. e-Education Research, 2023, 44(11): 28-35. [20] CHEN Zengzhao, SHI Yawen, WANG Mengke. The Realistic Picture of Artificial Intelligence Boosting Educational Reform: Analysis of Teachers’ Coping Strategies towards ChatGPT. Journal of Guangxi Normal University (Philosophy and Social Sciences Edition), 2023, 59(02): 75-85. [21] YANG Haiyan, LI Tao. ChatGPT Teaching Applications: Scenarios, Limitations, and Breakthrough Strategies. The Chinese Journal of ICT in Education, 2023, 29(6): 26-34. [22] WANG Youmei, WANG Dan, LIANG Weiyi, LIU Chenchen. “Aladdin’s Lamp” or “Pandora’s Box”: The Potential and Risks of ChatGPT in Educational Applications. Modern Distance Education Research, 2023, 35(02): 48-56. [23] CAO Hui, ZHAO Zihan. Trait Analysis, Educational Reflection, and Risk Response of ChatGPT: Based on the “Knowledge-Subject-Stance” Perspective. Modern Education Management, 2023(07): 75-84.