Synopsis

Recent discourse on Generative AI in education is often polarised: it is portrayed either as a workload saviour or a threat to teaching quality. Critics warn that without guidance, AI tools default to “behaviourist” biases, churning out formulaic, teacher-centred plans that stifle student inquiry. But what actually happens when these tools are put in the hands of experienced, constructivist educators?

This session presents the findings of a rigorous qualitative study conducted with IB teachers at an international school in Singapore. The research uncovers a counter-narrative: experienced teachers are not passively accepting AI’s default pedagogy. Instead, they employ specific strategies to “tame” the algorithm.

Moving beyond generic “prompt engineering,” this presentation outlines a research-backed framework for success. We will explore how expert educators adopt the stance of the “Critical Curator,” using strategies like “Pre-loading” and “Iterative Dialogue” to maintain their professional agency. Attendees will leave with a clear, evidence-based model for using AI as a “thought partner” that enhances, rather than dilutes, student-centred learning.

(Abridged version of the research paper available on request)

Key Learning Outcomes / Takeaways

By the end of this session, attendees will:

• Spot the “Behaviourist Trap”: Learn to diagnose the specific ways unguided AI defaults to low-quality, teacher-centred instruction—and why “formulaic” output threatens student agency.
• Master the “Critical Curator” Stance: Move beyond passive consumption using the specific “refusal” and “selection” strategies expert teachers use to override algorithmic bias and maintain professional agency.
• Deploy “Context Stacking”: Walk away with a concrete framework for “pre-loading” your pedagogical values (e.g., inquiry, differentiation) into the AI before you ask for a lesson plan, ensuring alignment from the very first prompt.
• Flip the Script for Agency: Discover how to transform AI from a teacher-efficiency tool into a student-inquiry engine using real-world examples like Socratic debate partners and historical simulators.

Session Outline (60-Minute Plan)

1. The Hook: The Myth of the “10-Second Lesson Plan” (10 mins)
   The Promise vs. The Reality: We start by dismantling the common fantasy of instant, perfect lesson planning.
   The “Behaviourist Trap”: A quick, relatable look at why unguided AI defaults to “safe” but boring lectures (the “Stochastic Parrot” problem) and why this scares experienced educators.
   The Challenge: Setting the stage—can we use these tools without losing our soul?
2. The Investigation: Inside the Planning of Expert Teachers (10 mins)
   Context: A look “under the hood” of a real IB International School in Singapore.
   The Surprise Finding: Contrary to the fear that teachers would become lazy, our study revealed that experts work harder to “tame” the AI.
   Visual Reveal: Showing the “Pedagogical DNA” charts from the study—comparing what the AI wanted to plan vs. what the teacher actually delivered.
3. The Toolkit: 4 Strategies to Tame the Algorithm (35 mins)
   Strategy 1: The Critical Curator. How to move from being a “consumer” to an “editor.” Real examples of teachers rejecting “whole plans” to cherry-pick the best components.
   Strategy 2: The “Context Stack” (Pre-loading). A practical walkthrough of the “Garbage In, Garbage Out” rule. We show how “front-loading” your teaching philosophy before asking for a lesson plan radically changes the output.
   Strategy 3: From Search Engine to Thought Partner. Shifting the mindset from “Write this for me” to “Critique my ideas.” Examples of Iterative Dialogue in action.
   Strategy 4: Flipping the Script. The most exciting finding: moving beyond teacher efficiency to student agency. Showcasing real examples like the “Socratic Chatbot” and “Historical Figure Simulator.”
4. Q&A (5 mins)
   Rapid-fire Q&A on implementation and practical next steps.
   Target Audience
   Primary Audience: K-12 Classroom Teachers (Middle/High School focus) looking for evidence-based practice.
   Secondary Audience: School Leaders and Curriculum Coordinators interested in policy and pedagogical integrity.

Note: Extended workshop version of this session is outlined here: sjii.info/AIPlanWorkshop