Embedded Files
Applied AI Resources for PSTs and ITE Courses
Applied AI Resources for PSTs and ITE Courses
This collection brings together practical resources that translate research on AI, emerging technologies, ethics and responsible practice into materials that can be used across education and research with SPre service Teachers, and by Initial teacher Educators. Each resource has a different purpose, from helping teachers, tutors, academics and researchers make complex issues usable in practice. The resources are designed to help people think more carefully about what technologies do, how they are being used, who may be affected, what choices remain available, and where responsibility sits. They can be used in teaching, learning, research, supervision and professional learning to support discussion, critical reflection and informed decision-making rather than simply providing instructions about how to use technology.
Please cite as: Arantes, J. (n.d.). Applied AI Resources. https://www.janinearantes.com/resources/applied-ai-resources
This resource demonstrates how visual narratives and signposting can be used to make the relationships between concepts, literature, methodology, findings and contributions easier for readers to follow.
This resource aims to support critical conversations about AI. It encourages us to move beyond enthusiasm for new tools and consider the assumptions, people, risks, consequences and broader systems that sit behind the adoption of AI in education.
This resource explores psychosocial risks for students in AI-mediated educational contexts. It encourages us to consider how AI-enabled systems and practices may shape student wellbeing, agency, safety, relationships and experiences of learning, and to look beyond questions of capability and academic integrity to the broader human impacts of AI in education.
This resource explores psychosocial risks for students in AI-mediated educational contexts. It encourages us to consider how AI-enabled systems and practices may shape student wellbeing, agency, safety, relationships and experiences of learning, and to look beyond questions of capability and academic integrity to the broader human impacts of AI in education.
This resource is a simple visual prompt for conversations about when we work or learn with AI, without AI, and about AI. It is designed to support purposeful choice and judgement and can be used in teaching, assessment, research, supervision or professional learning.
Starting real conversations: with preservice teachers and intital teacher educators
Starting real conversations: with preservice teachers and intital teacher educators
But did they actually write it?
But did they actually write it?
DO you want to critically think about AI with your Pre Service Teachers? This resources encourages you to investigate the hidden psychosocial risks and workforce impacts that Generative AI (GenAI) imposes on preservice teachers (PSTs), TAFE educators, and higher education academics. Rather than viewing GenAI strictly as a pedagogical or technical issue, the resource reframes it as a workplace health, safety, and governance challenge, specifically analyzing it against Safe Work Australia’s legal psychosocial hazard standards.
All images are generated
When we talk about 'classroom readiness' in your degrees, we usually talk about lesson plans and behaviour management. However, the moment you enter a school, that classroom is your legal workplace. Post-2022, Generative AI didn't just change how students cheat; it fundamentally reconfigured the data demands, time constraints, and emotional pressures placed on your shoulders. To be classroom-ready, you must be workforce-ready. Let’s look at the hidden strain that GenAI brings teachers.
2. We often hear tech companies tell us that AI will 'save teachers time.' But the data from this study shows the opposite. Not a single educator surveyed viewed GenAI as neutral or harmless. More than half immediately appraise it as a threat to their time and boundaries. Nearly 40% are suffering from arguably a new form of chronic workplace stress: the anxiety of policing algorithmic output and the fear of making false accusations.
3. When we are forced to deal with an ambiguous tech disruption without institutional guardrails, you run out of problem-focused strategies. We can’t fix the detector, and we can’t stop the software rollout. What happens? Educators default to emotion-focused coping. Half of the experienced staff interviewed in this study began emotionally withdrawing from their work and their students just to survive the exhaustion.
4. You do not enter schools defenceless. There are three important legal frameworks that protect you as a worker. First, Safe Work Australia dictates that your employer must mitigate psychosocial hazards: high workloads and ambiguous roles are illegal safety hazards. Second, the government's own AI Guardrails demand that human oversight must control high-risk tech (as of 2025). And third, emerging safety legislation like the GBV Code in Higher Education binds institutions to protect staff from digital violence like deepfakes and the exploitative hidden work often and the often uncredited emotional labor onto a largely feminised workforce.
Discussion
The AITSL Professional Standards for Teachers provide an important framework for professional practice. But professional standards are only one part of the picture. As educators, your responsibilities around AI do not exist separately from your rights as a worker. The classroom is not only a learning environment; it is also a workplace. Conversations about responsible AI therefore need to consider not only what teachers are professionally expected to do, but also what institutions and employers are responsible for providing: clear roles and processes, appropriate resources and support, manageable workloads, consultation, and the management of psychosocial risks.
Questions:
Where is the line between a teacher’s professional responsibility and an employer’s responsibility when GenAI creates additional work?
Has GenAI changed what educators are expected to do without those changes being formally recognised in workload or role descriptions?
What support and role clarity do educators need when making decisions about suspected AI use?
Who carries the risk when an AI-related decision goes wrong?
How should professional standards and workplace health and safety obligations work alongside each other?
What workplace protections should remain important regardless of how the AITSL Standards change?
Before introducing new AI expectations, what should institutions provide in terms of consultation, training, resources and workload support?
If you would like a presentation at your University or Workplace, please contact: janine.arantes@vu.edu.au
Page updated
Google Sites
Report abuse