Search

Teacher Presence and Systemic Thinking Pedagogy in the Age of AI: Structural Transformation of University Classrooms

Author(s)

Renyuan Nong

Affiliation(s)

School of Business Administration, Baise University, Baise, Guangxi, China

Abstract

With the rapid integration of generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) into higher education, the structure of teaching and learning in university classrooms is undergoing a profound transformation. While AI enhances efficiency in knowledge production, it also risks fragmenting students’ cognitive processes and diminishing the depth of thinking. Based on a three-month classroom intervention and observation, this study investigates changes in students’ learning behaviors within AI-assisted writing contexts, revealing a phenomenon of “absent thinking” caused by uncritical AI dependence. The study identifies systemic thinking ability as a key indicator of deep learning and cognitive independence, proposing a scaffolding-based pedagogical model rooted in the concept of teacher presence. The “demonstration–feedback–reflection” framework enables students to develop higher-order questioning, cross-disciplinary integration, and meta-cognitive reflection. Findings suggest that teacher presence functions as both a cognitive scaffold and a systemic catalyst, guiding learners from AI reliance toward AI mastery. The paper concludes with the Systemic Thinking-Oriented Pedagogical (STOP) Model, offering a theoretical and practical framework for the structural transformation of university teaching in the age of AI.

Keywords

Teacher Presence; Systemic Thinking; AI-Assisted Learning; Scaffolding Pedagogy; University Classroom Transformation

References

[1] Bowen J. A., Watson C. E. Teaching with AI: A Practical Guide to a New Era of Human Learning. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2024. [2] Ahmed S. A. Learning, Meaning, and Teaching in the Age of AI: Communication Development Checkpoints. Frontiers in Education, in press. [3] Ren X., Wu M. L. Examining Teaching Competencies and Challenges while Integrating Artificial Intelligence in Higher Education. TechTrends, 2025, 69(2):155–172. [4] George A., Mathew M. S. Revamping Art Education for the Digital Age: A Social Media-Driven Framework for Artrepreneurial Pedagogy. Frontiers in Education, 2025, 9:1678514. [5] Yaftian N., Niknam R. Artificial Intelligence: A Facilitator in Enhancing Mathematics Instruction. Mathematics and Society, 2025, 2(1):48–63. [6] Laurillard D. Teaching as a Design Science: Building Pedagogical Patterns for Learning and Technology. London: Routledge, 2012. [7] Bruner J. Toward a Theory of Instruction. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1966. [8] Senge P. The Fifth Discipline: The Art & Practice of the Learning Organization. New York: Doubleday, 1990. [9] Bloom B. S. Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: The Classification of Educational Goals. New York: Longmans, 1957. [10]Wood D., Bruner J. S., Ross G. The Role of Tutoring in Problem Solving. Proceedings of the 9th Annual Conference of Cognitive Development Studies, Oxford, UK, 1976. [11]Vygotsky L. S. Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1978.