Currently reading Laidlaw (2026): “When faculty ask, ‘what’s the point of teaching?’: GenAI as identity crisis, not skills gap”

Another article that I read just now and that really resonated with me is Laidlaw (2026), where they explore teachers’ reactions to GenAI as an identity crisis, not a skills gap.

Similarly to what Laidlaw (2026) describes, I have met a lot of colleagues who make comments like “what’s the point of teaching?”, and I very much agree with the diagnosis of an identity crisis that cannot be addressed by skills training, because the lack of skills is not the point. The point is that teachers are wondering how they are supposed to compete with AI that is available to respond instantaneous and 24/7, doesn’t sigh at questions being asked repeatedly, allegedly knows all the information in the whole world, can make up an unlimited amount of practice questions, can explain every concept in exactly the way students would like it explained. They are wondering what skills are still worth teaching, what employers will require, what the job market will look like in the future, both for themselves and their students. As Laidlaw (2026) writes, “they are questioning foundational assumptions about their professional role and pedagogical practice“.

Laidlaw (2026) discusses AI as a threshold concept, and the academic development work required as helping teachers get through the troublesome, liminal space. This leads to several recommendations:

• We need to create space for continuous identity work to figure out what it is that teachers can give to students that AI cannot. A great suggestion is starting sessions with prompts like “‘Share a moment when GenAI made you question something fundamental about your teaching’”
• In addition to academic development sessions, identity work can be supported by, for example, reflective writing or (peer-)mentoring
• All of this needs to happen in context of disciplinary cultures as well as across disciplines
• Adaption will happen faster in some places than in others, and there might even be — valid! — “principled non-adoption“

It is important to support teachers in this identity work, not just for their own sake, but also because teacher anxiety leads to student anxiety, and that can lead to breakdown in the relationship as discussed earlier. And of course teachers who have gotten over the threshold already can better support students in figuring out what AI means for them — their role as learners, the value of what they will be learning, their future as employees, etc. This facet isn’t discussed in this at all, but of course there is also a lot of identity work that needs to be done by students who already need to figure out who they are in the world, coming into a profession, etc…

What I really appreciate about this article is how it really highlights the emotional work that is required from teachers by the existence of AI, and how this is really complex: “transformation requires holding grief and excitement, confusion and clarity simultaneously“. I also really like the concluding sentence: “Our role is not to push faculty across thresholds but to walk alongside them as they navigate this liminal terrain, offering support for the messy, recursive, deeply human work of becoming different.” Because it is really about becoming different in who we relate to the world!

This article really speaks to me as I am currently preparing workshops for teachers on AI, but am also working with our sustainability MOOC. I read about Students as Partners as a threshold concept a while back, which this article reminded me of, and maybe looking at teaching sustainability through that lens is a good way to approach it. In many ways, what is written here about AI directly translates to teaching sustainability:

• It’s transformative: Teachers need to fundamentally rethink how they see their role as a teacher
• Troublesome: There is the conflict with academic paradigms as discussed by Lidgren (2006), and also questioning their role and the role of education
• Irrevesible: Once you start seeing your responsibility as a teacher, you cannot unsee it. I have this observation confirmed by so many conversations with colleagues!
• Integrative: Sustainability touches everything we do in the world, I cannot imagine anything more integrative than sustainability
• Bounded: This one I am not so sure about. Maybe in the context of sustainability it means that everything we do depends very much on context?

Anyway, this article has given me lots of new ideas to ponder!

Laidlaw, P. (2026). When faculty ask, ‘what’s the point of teaching?’: GenAI as identity crisis, not skills gap. International Journal for Academic Development, 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360144X.2026.2680432

Favourite place looks different every day!

Early morning beach

And more beach…