CFP for Teaching Authentic Thinking in the Age of AI: Theory, Pedagogy, and Practice
Organization: Augusta University
CALL FOR PAPERS
Teaching Authentic Thinking in the Age of AI: Theory, Pedagogy, and Practice
Editors: Trent M. Kays, PhD (Augusta University); Rosita Scerbo, PhD (Georgia State University); and Stefanie Sevcik, PhD (Mercer University)
THE PROBLEM
Students carry ChatGPT in their pockets. They can generate competent essays in seconds. Traditional assignments become trivial to automate.
How should we teach?
This edited collection responds to that question. We move beyond plagiarism panic and detection software to ask: What does authentic intellectual work look like when AI can produce instant analysis? How do we design pedagogy that preserves human agency in knowledge-making?
WHAT WE'RE DOING
This collection brings together three types of scholarship:
Theoretical work that establishes conceptual frameworks, drawing on philosophy of technology (Stiegler, Heidegger, Simondon), digital rhetoric, composition theory, critical pedagogy, and related fields.
Pedagogical frameworks that develop teaching philosophies and methodological approaches, assignment design principles, assessment strategies, scaffolding techniques, discipline-specific responses.
Practical applications that provide concrete assignments, exercises, and classroom strategies, complete with learning objectives, implementation guidance, rubrics, and reflection on what works (and what doesn't).
We're not interested in tips and tricks. We want rigorous engagement with what AI means for teaching and learning.
We are preparing this submission to UGA Press; however, other presses will be queried about this work, including MIT Press and Peter Lang.
WHO SHOULD SUBMIT
We want contributions from:
- Scholars working on AI, pedagogy, digital literacy, rhetoric, composition, educational technology, philosophy of technology, critical theory.
- Practitioners with concrete assignment designs, classroom strategies, or case studies, especially if you're willing to reflect critically on implementation, challenges, and student responses.
- Graduate students and early-career scholars who are navigating AI in their teaching and have insights to share.
- Educators across disciplines and institutional contexts, including in community colleges, liberal arts colleges, R1 universities, international institutions. This isn't just a single discipline problem.
- Scholars working in critical frameworks, including critical race theory, feminist pedagogy, queer theory, disability studies, decolonial approaches.
- AI amplifies existing inequities. We need work that addresses this directly.
TOPICS
Here's what we're thinking about. Your work doesn't need to fit neatly into one category.
Theoretical Questions
What does "authentic thinking" mean, and can we even define it? How do different theoretical traditions (phenomenology, embodied cognition, social constructivism, posthumanism) help us understand human-AI learning? What happens to concepts like authorship, originality, creativity, and intellectual property? When does AI use become intellectual labor, and when does it become automation? How do AI systems reproduce colonial, racial, gendered, ableist hierarchies in educational contexts?
Pedagogical Challenges
How do we design assignments that require thinking AI can't replicate? What does process pedagogy look like when products appear instantly? How do we assess authentic thinking rather than polished outputs? What role should AI play in different types of courses and at different learning stages? How do we teach students to interrogate and evaluate AI critically? What happens to collaborative learning, peer review, and classroom discussion?
Practical Concerns
What specific assignments work? Which fails, and why? How do we create rubrics for assessing thinking processes? What scaffolding helps students develop metacognitive awareness? How do we make space for experimentation and failure? What can't AI do, and how do we build assignments around those limitations? How do we work within institutional constraints like large classes, contingent labor, limited resources?
Justice Issues
Who benefits from AI integration, and who gets left behind? How do we address linguistic bias in AI systems? What happens to multilingual students and scholars? How does AI access correlate with existing educational inequities? What labor issues emerge when intellectual work becomes automated? How do we center marginalized voices rather than treating AI as a universal "tool"? How does AI intersect with neurodivergence, disability, and different learning abilities, as well as with the experiences of first-generation students, multilingual learners, working students, student parents and caregivers, undocumented and precariously situated students, and students navigating mental health challenges, particularly in relation to assessment, accessibility, accommodation, and normative assumptions about cognition and ‘authentic’ thinking?
KEYWORDS
- Artificial Intelligence
- Generative AI
- ChatGPT
- Large Language Models
- Authentic Thinking
- Critical Thinking
- Pedagogy
- Assignment Design
- Digital Literacy
- Technological Literacy
- Writing Pedagogy
- Assessment
- Higher Education
- Academic Integrity
- Philosophy of Technology
- Rhetoric and Composition
SUBMISSION TYPES
Full Chapters (6,000-8,000 words)
Traditional scholarly work with sustained argument, literature review, theoretical grounding. Can focus on theory, pedagogy, or practice but should demonstrate rigor.
Practical Essays (4,000-6,000 words)
Practice-focused work providing detailed pedagogical strategies, assignment sequences, or classroom approaches. Include theoretical rationale and honest reflection on implementation. What worked? What didn't? What would you change?
Assignment Showcases (2,000-4,000 words)
Focused presentation of specific assignments or exercises. Include:
- Clear learning objectives
- Complete assignment description (give us enough detail to adapt it)
- Theoretical/pedagogical rationale (why this assignment?)
- Implementation guidance (logistics, timing, common issues)
- Assessment approach (how do you evaluate success?)
- Honest reflection (what happened when you tried this?)
- Adaptability notes (how might others modify this?)
HOW TO SUBMIT
Proposals should be ~500 words and include:
- Working title
- Section (Theory, Pedagogy, or Practice)
- Type (Full Chapter, Practical Essay, or Assignment Showcase)
- Abstract addressing:
- Your central argument or contribution
- Theoretical framework(s) or scholarly grounding
- Methods (if relevant—especially for empirical work)
- Main findings or key points
- Why this matters for the collection
- Select bibliography (5-7 sources) List key sources informing your chapter
- Author bio(s) (150 words max per author) Include institutional affiliation, relevant expertise, contact info
All work must be submitted in DOCX format and follow APA citation style, and this edited collection will follow Anti-Racist Scholarly Reviewing Practices. Please submit your abstract OR any questions to the below contact editor. Please include the subject line: “Authentic Thinking Abstract–[submitter’s last name].” For example: “Authentic Thinking Abstract–Kays.”
- Abstract Deadline: March 15
- Notification of Decision: April 1
- Full Chapter Submission: End of Summer 2026
Contact Editor
- Trent M. Kays, PhD
- Department of English and World Languages
- Augusta University
- tkays@augusta.edu
Trent M. Kays, PhD