Answer 1: 

When generative AI can create nearly every type of instructional material: lesson plans, quizzes, study guides, and rubrics, and even grade those assignments based on those rubrics for us, what’s left for teachers to do?

Plenty, but only if we stop confusing content delivery with education.

We have seen this pattern before. When open educational resources became widely available, when Wikipedia put an entire encyclopedia at everyone’s fingertips, and when the internet made nearly all human knowledge searchable in seconds, many predicted that teachers would become obsolete. They were wrong then, and they will be wrong now. What persisted, and what still matters, is not just access to information, but guidance through it. Content alone does not create clarity, context, or conviction.

AI will very soon be better than all of us at generating tailored lesson plans, assignments, and even feedback. That is not a threat; it is a relief. It takes care of the routine so educators can return to their true role: forming minds, hearts, and character, building not just learners, but whole people.

The core competitiveness of teachers will continue to shift from knowledge delivery to learning design. Not just what students learn, but how, when, and why. Educators will need to think like learning architects, creating learning experiences where AI scaffolds growth.

However, there is a real risk in embracing AI in the classroom too early. If we allow teachers to use AI to create assignments, why not let students use AI to start at the top of Bloom’s Taxonomy and simply create the answers? The critical distinction is that educators can assess and refine AI output; most students cannot. Allowing AI to carry all the cognitive weight for students undermines their intellectual growth. Students may succeed in the short term, but only until they are expected to think for themselves.

If we let students rely on AI too soon, we risk bypassing the foundational thinking that enables genuine learning. Unlike some of our colleagues who cling to outdated strategies, banning AI, spending hours enforcing its restriction, and then lamenting students’ academic dishonesty, readers of this journal are more forward-thinking. Still, we must be careful. Flipping Bloom’s Taxonomy on its head turns classrooms into production lines of polished but shallow work.

I prefer a gentler approach: build a foundation, then invite students to engage, with AI, with each other, and with me, but only after they have demonstrated they can do the thinking for themselves. This is where the irreplaceable value of educators lies: in discernment. We teach students how to struggle productively. We recognize when to step in, when to step back, and when to let them wrestle with complexity.

AI may be the tool of the future. But teachers? We are still the architects of it.

—By Prof. Andrew S.I.D. Lang, Oral Roberts University, USA, The Irreplaceable Value of Educators in the Age of Generative AI

Answer 2:

While AI excels at generating personalized content and automating routine tasks, the core competitiveness of teachers—across all levels—will increasingly lie in uniquely human engagement and values that AI cannot replicate. As generative AI handles lesson planning, grading patterns, and content customization, educators will pivot toward deeper interpersonal roles.

Irreplaceable teacher competencies include the ability to share meaningful personal experiences, cultivate critical thinking, and demonstrate genuine empathy. Human educators excel at guiding ethical debates, embedding local societal values into lessons, understanding students' social-emotional needs, and fostering cultural awareness. These are not just instructional duties—they are deeply human acts requiring lived experience and moral insight.

Teachers also play a vital role in developing leadership and motivation through emotional intelligence—skills that cannot be coded. Storytelling with dynamic pacing, humor, and contextual relevance is another powerful tool teachers use to inspire learning, one that AI cannot authentically reproduce.

Furthermore, educators align program outcomes with institutional missions, something that demands strategic vision and institutional knowledge. Advising students on complex academic, personal, and cultural matters requires a layered understanding of human challenges—well beyond AI's capability.

In assessment, while AI can grade structured responses, it struggles with subjective tasks like evaluating creativity, originality, or emotional nuance in essays and projects. Educators also foster trust, read classroom energy, and adapt intuitively—critical in maintaining a positive learning environment.

In summary, as AI transforms education delivery, human educators remain indispensable for mentoring, emotional connection, ethical leadership, and cultural transmission—roles deeply rooted in humanity, not algorithms.

—By Prof. S.M.F.D Syed Mustapha, Zayed University, United Arab Emirates

Answer 3: 

The integration of generative AI into education marks a paradigm shift in how learning experiences are designed and delivered. The traditional indicators of teacher competitiveness, like curriculum design and lesson planning effectiveness, are probably going to become less important as AI develops the ability to create highly customized lesson plans. Rather, educators' primary competitiveness will change to focus on distinctively human qualities that AI cannot imitate.

Emotional intelligence—the capacity to inspire, motivate, sympathize, and address students' social-emotional needs—is at the forefront. Particularly crucial in early and adolescent education, human educators provide relational depth that promotes a secure and welcoming learning environment.

Τhe pedagogical judgment of teachers is still invaluable. Artificial intelligence is capable of processing data and making recommendations for learning paths, but it lacks contextual awareness and the sophisticated insight needed to handle a range of student backgrounds, learning obstacles, and cultural dynamics. Teachers use intuition and experience in addition to data to interpret complex classroom dynamics and make adjustments in real time.

Beyond merely imparting knowledge, educators also foster creativity, ethics, and critical thinking. They guide students through ambiguity, moral decision-making, and socially responsible knowledge engagement. These roles are inherently human and demand moral agency, something AI does not possess.

Last but not least, educators act as role models, influencing students' identities, values, and goals—roles that call for genuineness and interpersonal relationships.

Essentially, AI will redefine the role of teachers rather than replace them. The ability of human educators to engage, motivate, and mentor students in ways that go beyond algorithmic capabilities is what makes them so valuable. In the future AI-augmented classroom, educators who embrace AI as a tool while enhancing their human-centred strengths will continue to be vital and relevant.

—By Prof. Michail Kalogiannakis, University of Thessaly, Greece

Answer 4: 

Answer 5:

This question could more usefully focus not upon teachers' competitiveness but upon the efficiency and quality of the student experience. A substantial body of evidence points to the effectiveness of formative assessment and dialogic tutoring in fostering deep learning – but these approaches have hitherto necessitated small teaching groups. In addition, much productive learning can arise from collaborative teamwork in gaming and simulation environments. Existing AI-enhanced learning management systems tend to focus upon specialist applications and the learning of isolated individuals. The synergies of Generative AI with learning analytics offer the opportunity for multi-agent learning management systems to orchestrate tutoring, personalised tasks, team challenges, formative assessment and continuous feedback. This approach would have the potential to incentivise and empower students and would enable educational institutions to provide quality learning experiences at scale.

—By Dr. Peter Williams, (retired) University of Hull, United Kingdom

Answer 6:

I recently saw a movie. I don't think I can advertise it, so I won't mention the title but I'll vaguely describe the plot. In short, among the many other things that happen in the movie, there is a scientist as the protagonist who, despite having the possibility of receiving complete support from an intelligent robotic system, refuses it because this support would only happen if this intelligence could access her own intelligence, that is, all her knowledge, memories, feelings and emotions. Her refusal is firm. Dictated by the fear that this opening of her mind to an external system could somehow make her more fragile. The system doesn't give up and insists until, in the end, the scientist gives in. What comes out of it is something wonderful for me! Here, artificial intelligence has in our lives the role that this robotic system assumes in the movie. It is becoming a sort of "prosthesis" but it doesn't just give us passive support. Its help is active and becomes increasingly valid if we ourselves feed it with valid, rich, effective sources. Artificial intelligence lives and grows thanks to us, we live and grow thanks to it. From this symbiosis everyone has something to gain for a progress that can make our lives better. I think it is stupid to avoid all this. Here, this is the symbiosis that must also be established in the world of teaching. A mutual relationship that feeds and supports each other's knowledge. Artificial intelligence for teachers and teachers for artificial intelligence. I am convinced that the role of human teachers must still be this: to be teachers! ...and also to teach artificial intelligence to be better for a better future and a better education. 

—By Dr. Sergio Miranda, University of Salerno, Italy