Generative Artificial Intelligence as a Transformative Catalyst for a Learning Paradigm Shift
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.3991/ijac.v19i2.58883Keywords:
Learning paradigm, Learning with Generative AI, Generativism, Artificial IntelligenceAbstract
The rapid integration of Generative AI (Gen AI) into education has raised fundamental questions about its influence on learning, prompting debate on whether it represents a new learning paradigm. This inquiry exploration contributes to the discussion on whether the unique dynamics of learning with Gen AI implies a new learning paradigm. By establishing the criteria for a paradigm shift, we analyzed the anomalies that Gen AI creates for established traditional paradigms (i.e., Behaviorism, Cognitivism, and Constructivism) demonstrating their insufficiency to explain the dynamics of the human learning with Gen AI. Hence, we propose and formally define a new paradigm in which learning is understood as a distributed process enacted through a human engagement with Gen AI-artifact system. In this model, the learner acts as an orchestrator, guiding iterative sequence of prompting, generation, critique, and refinement. The new paradigm will provide educators and researchers with a coherent conceptual language to design and study learning in the age of Gen AI. The study concludes by outlining verifiable suggestions to guide future empirical validation of this new paradigm.
References
[1] Kasneci, E., Seßler, K., Küchemann, S., Bannert, M., Dementieva, D., Fischer, F., ... & Kasneci, G. (2023). ChatGPT for good? On opportunities and challenges of large language models for education. Learning and Individual Differences, 103, 102274. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2023.102274
[2] Chan, C. K. Y., & Hu, W. (2023). Students’ voices on generative AI: Perceptions, benefits, and challenges in higher education. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 20(1), 43. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-023-00411-8
[3] Noy, S., & Zhang, W. (2023). Experimental evidence on the productivity effects of generative artificial intelligence. Science, 381(6654), pp. 187–192. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.adh2586
[4] Gruenhagen, J. H., Sinclair, P. M., Carroll, J. A., Baker, P. R., Wilson, A., & Demant, D. (2024). The rapid rise of generative AI and its implications for academic integrity: Students’ perceptions and use of chatbots for assistance with assessments. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 7, 100273. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2024.100273
[5] Alagic, M., & Byun, J. (2025). Transformative learning in the age of generative AI: Educators' perspectives on a paradigm shift. In Proceedings of The Learning Ideas Conference 2025, New York, NY.
[6] Pratschke, B. M. (2024). Generativism. In Generative AI and Education: Digital Pedagogies, Teaching Innovation and Learning Design (pp. 57–72). Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland.
[7] Kuhn, T. S. (1962). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
[8] Ertmer, P. A., & Newby, T. J. (2013). Behaviorism, cognitivism, constructivism: Comparing critical features from an instructional design perspective. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 26(2), pp. 43–71. https://doi.org/10.1002/piq.21143
[9] Kuhn, T. S. (1970). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (2nd ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
[10] Skinner, B. F. (1953). Science and Human Behavior. New York: Macmillan.
[11] Neisser, U. (1967). Cognitive Psychology. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
[12] Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
[13] Bruner, J. (1990). Acts of Meaning. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
[14] Siemens, G. (2005). Connectivism: A learning theory for the digital age. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 2(1), pp. 3–10. http://www.itdl.org/Journal/Jan_05/article01.htm
[15] Kleingeld, P., & Willaschek, M. (2019). Autonomy without paradox: Kant, self-legislation and the moral law. Philosophers’ Imprint, 19(6), pp. 1–18. https://doi.org/2027/spo.3521354.0019.006
[16] Floridi, L., & Sanders, J. W. (2004). On the morality of artificial agents. Minds and Machines, 14(3), pp. 349–379. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:MIND.0000035461.63578.9d
[17] Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive–developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34(10), pp. 906–911. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.34.10.906
[18] Hutchins, E. (2000). Distributed cognition. In H. Pashler (Ed.), Stevens’ Handbook of Experimental Psychology (pp. 425–455). New York: Wiley.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Jaehwan Byun, Mara Alagic

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.