Step into the future of education with our interactive genAIdentity survey and workshop! Designed to spark curiosity, comfort, and conversation, this study explores how educators see themselves in a world increasingly shaped by generative Artificial Intelligence (genAI). Open to ALL curious minds, our dynamic workshop invites participants to reflect on their comfort levels, perceptions, and professional development needs around genAI use. Through collaborative and thoughtful discussion, we’re gathering fresh insights into how genAI is reshaping teaching and learning. Take the time to discover your genAIdentity and help us shape the future of education!
Our team is happy to provide personalized educational workshops and support, but feel free to explore your own comfort levels independently of the workshops. We have since expanded our project to pilot a complimenting learner-facing survey that can be found further down the website page.
Follow along the self-guided experience for educators below...
Traditional Thinker
This person resists in adopting genAI technologies primarily because they either don’t see value in it or fear potential risks. They also may not even realize they interact with AI in subtle ways.
Core orientation: Avoidance and/or resistance.
Key Distinction: Doesn't see value and/or fears risks.
Puddle Jumper
This person is comfortable with technology and may even be quite tech-savvy, but they “jump in and out” of generative AI use. They approach GenAI with intention, using it selectively and purposefully in contexts where it clearly supports their work, goals, or values, and stepping back when it feels unnecessary or uncertain.
Core orientation: Selective and intentional.
Key Distinction: Engages only when purpose aligns.
Curious Explorer
This person is open to experimenting with genAI, though they remain cautious. They use more than just essential tools (e.g., leveraging genAI for project management or learning); they seek to understand its limitations and risks.
Core orientation: Experimental but cautious.
Key Distinction: Seeks to understand and test.
Deep Diver
This person integrates genAI into their daily routine and views it as indispensable. They are confident using various genAI-powered tools and may customize or optimize these tools for specific needs.
Core orientation: Confident and habitual.
Key Distinction: Integrates and customizes.
Below we've provided some different ways you can start and/or continue a conversation with others. Keeping your genAIdentity in mind, you can explore different topics, scenarios, and questions that have been created based off real experiences that have been shared with our team.
Some guiding discussion questions to reflect on:
Day-to-Day Use (General Use): What aspects of your genAIdentity feel most accurate or familiar to you, and why?
This encourages reflection on everyday habits, patterns of use, and personal alignment with identity labels.
Use in Assessment (Formal or Informal): Are there ethical considerations or concerns that shape how comfortable you feel using genAI, regardless of your assigned identity?
This invites reflection on how ethical concerns (e.g., academic integrity, fairness, authorship) may intersect with comfort in using genAI in evaluative settings.
Educational Practices: How might your genAIdentity influence how you engage with genAI tools in your teaching or work?
Encourages application-focused thinking: how their identity affects planning, instructional design, or classroom integration.
Fears and Challenges: Is there anything in your genAIdentity that doesn’t quite fit? What might explain that gap?
This surfaces tension points, hesitations, or barriers, inviting discussion about discomfort, confidence, or uncertainty.
Extra - Peer Learning: Did someone else you spoke with receive a different genAIdentity that caught you off guard? How do your experiences compare?
This serves as a flexible peer comparison prompt that spans all domains, encouraging social reflection and shared meaning-making.
Have a go at some of our scenario questions! Keeping your genAIdentity in mind, how would you go about these situations? Explore a variety of K-12 and research-themed scenarios.
Our team is currently working towards a learner-facing survey to compliment our educator-facing survey. The goal is that educators and learners can take the surveys to help situate the group's comfort around genAI in the classroom, as well as support setting expectations and guidelines for genAI use. We are currently piloting the learner-facing survey and if you're interested in trying it out yourself or with your learners, feel free to take the survey below. We welcome feedback and suggestions as we continue to validate the survey.
Slow-and-Steady Scholar
This person doesn’t use genAI very much, and may feel unsure about trying new genAI tools. They prefer sticking with what already works for them, and takes their time, moves at their own pace, and explores technology when it feels useful and safe.
Core orientation: Avoidance and/or resistance.
Key Distinction: Doesn't see value and/or fears risks.
Intentional Hopper
This person uses genAI when it feels helpful but doesn’t rely on it. They pick and choose what tools to use. They may stick to familiar options, like chatbots, voice assistants, or study apps. They enjoy being in control of the tools and using genAI when it genuinely supports their learning or creativity.
Core orientation: Selective and intentional.
Key Distinction: Engages only when purpose aligns.
Inquisitive Adapter
This person is curious, active, and always exploring. They enjoy experimenting with genAI to learn, organize tasks, solve problems, or spark creativity. They’re open to new things but still thoughtful. They like understanding how tools work and what their limitations are before fully relying on them.
Core orientation: Experimental but cautious.
Key Distinction: Seeks to understand and test.
Smooth Cruiser
This person uses genAI confidently and often. They explore different apps, features, and AI tools, and are comfortable customizing them to fit their needs. They see genAI as a helpful companion for learning, creativity, and daily life. They’re eager to dive in, test things out, and see what’s possible.
Core orientation: Confident and habitual.
Key Distinction: Integrates and customizes.
If you want to create your own teaching-learner scenarios, here are some things we considered as we created the scenarios:
Who is involved and what is the issue?
What are the ethical and moral considerations?
When could this scenario be applicable (to your own experiences or to others)?
Where could this scenario cause challenges and tensions with admin/policies/learners?
Why is this important?
How does the scenario help students and educators navigate AI conversations?
We consider comfort as representing educators’ emotional readiness to engage with technological change while maintaining coherence with their professional and moral values. Comfort throughout this workshop represents the emotional layer through which educators make sense of the emerging tools, policies, and cultural discourses around genAI use.
Fawns (2022) explains how human and technological practices are deeply interconnected, and that comfort helps educators navigate this relationship as they adopt technology use.
This tool is informed by the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) by Davis (from 1989) and its updates by Sánchez-Prieto and colleagues (from 2020), as well as the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) by Venkatesh et al. (2003, 2012, 2016).
Our informal self-assessment tool helps individuals evaluate their comfort levels with genAI, providing recommendations tailored to each individual’s comfort level, and encouraging gradual learning and conversations about genAI use in educational and learning environments.
Each of the genAIdentity personas are hand-drawn to reflect how visual representation and ethics can intersect in design-based research, while emphasizing warmth, inclusivity, and artistic individuality.
Stay tuned for our learner-facing survey & workshop!
Contact Us:
Lydia Scholle-Cotton: lydia.cotton@queensu.ca
Cheryl Lee-Yow: cheryl.leeyow@queensu.ca
Emily Luo: emily.luo@queensu.ca
Acknowledgments: Special thanks to @lockedlaundromat for the genAIdentity designs. Thank you to Queen's University Centre for Community Engagement and Social Change and Queen's STEAM+ Group for providing grant initial project funding for the 2025/26 year. Thank you, Drs. Saad Chahine and Pamela Beach, for all the support, guidance, and mentorship throughout the development of this project.
This project has received ethical approval from the Queen’s General Research Ethics Board.