Theoretical Foundations for University Didactic with Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI). The DIDACT.AI model
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17398/1695-288X.25.2.17Keywords:
Artificial Intelligence, symbiotic learning, critical thinking, academic task, higher education, instructional designAbstract
Generative artificial intelligence (AI) in higher education is causing a pedagogical disruption that affects the meaning of academic tasks, assessment processes, teaching roles, and students’ relationship with knowledge. Academic studies and publications have focused on describing instrumental uses, ethical risks, or digital competences, without sufficiently developing a didactic theory to guide the integration of AI into teaching and learning processes. This article aims to identify the theoretical foundations for university didactics with AI designed to foster the development of critical thinking. To this end, it adopts an integrative theoretical essay approach, bringing together contributions from distributed human-machine cognition, psychological and sociocultural approaches to critical thinking, and teaching theory. As a result, a conceptual framework is proposed for symbiotic learning, academic tasks as the instructional context of this interaction, and critical thinking as a condition for preserving students’ epistemic agency. Finally, a didactic model, called DIDACT.IA, is presented, based on six dimensions: interrogation, comparison, critical dialogue, verification, personal reworking, and reflection. The article concludes that the model requires further empirical validation in different contexts of university teaching practice.
Downloads
References
Area-Moreira, M. (2025). Luces y sombras de la IA en la educación superior: Didáctica para el pensamiento crítico. Repositorio Institucional de la Universidad de La Laguna. https://riull.ull.es/xmlui/handle/915/40470
Area-Moreira, M., & González-González, M. C. (2026). Análisis de un caso práctico de un modelo didáctico para el pensamiento crítico con la inteligencia artificial en educación superior. Pixel-Bit. Revista de Medios y Educación, 76, Article 1. https://doi.org/10.12795/pixelbit.116639
Bailin, S. (2002). Critical thinking and science education. Science & Education, 11(4), 361–375. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1016042608621
Bittle, K., & El-Gayar, O. (2025). Generative AI and academic integrity in higher education: A systematic review and research agenda. Information, 16(4), Article 296. https://doi.org/10.3390/info16040296
Bloom, B. S. (Ed.). (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals. Handbook I: Cognitive domain. Longmans, Green.
Chan, C. K. Y., & Tsi, L. H. Y. (2024). Will generative AI replace teachers in higher education? A study of teacher and student perceptions. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 83, Article 101395. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2024.101395
Chiu, T. K. F. (2026). Human-centric artificial intelligence pedagogy (HCAP) framework developed from TPACK through integration of artificial intelligence literacy and competency. Interactive Learning Environments, 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2026.2615818
Clark, A., & Chalmers, D. (1998). The extended mind. Analysis, 58(1), 7–19. https://doi.org/10.1093/analys/58.1.7
Coeckelbergh, M. (2026). AI and epistemic agency: How AI influences belief revision and its normative implications. Social Epistemology, 40(1), 59–71. https://doi.org/10.1080/02691728.2025.2466164
Crompton, H., & Burke, D. (2023). Artificial intelligence in higher education: The state of the field. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 20, Article 22. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-023-00392-8
Dawson, P., Bearman, M., Dollinger, M., & Boud, D. (2024). Validity matters more than cheating. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 49(7), 1005–1016. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2024.2386662
Dellermann, D., Ebel, P., Söllner, M., & Leimeister, J. M. (2019). Hybrid intelligence. Business & Information Systems Engineering, 61(5), 637–643. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12599-019-00595-2
Doyle, W. (1983). Academic work. Review of Educational Research, 53(2), 159–199. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543053002159
Doyle, W., & Carter, K. (1984). Academic tasks in classrooms. Curriculum Inquiry, 14(2), 129–149. https://doi.org/10.1080/03626784.1984.11075917
Engeström, Y., & Sannino, A. (2021). From mediated actions to heterogenous coalitions: Four generations of activity-theoretical studies of work and learning. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 28(1), 4-23. https://doi.org/10.1080/10749039.2020.1806328
Ennis, R. H. (1985). A logical basis for measuring critical thinking skills. Educational Leadership, 43(2), 44–48.
Facione, P. A. (1990). Critical thinking: A statement of expert consensus for purposes of educational assessment and instruction: Research findings and recommendations. American Philosophical Association.
Francis, N. J., Jones, S., & Smith, D. P. (2025). Generative AI in higher education: Balancing innovation and integrity. British Journal of Biomedical Science, 81, Article 14048. https://doi.org/10.3389/bjbs.2024.14048
Gagné, R. M. (1985). The conditions of learning and theory of instruction (4th ed.). Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Goodyear, P., Carvalho, L., & Yeoman, P. (2021). Activity-Centred Analysis and Design (ACAD): Core purposes, distinctive qualities and current developments. Educational Technology Research and Development, 69, 445-464. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-020-09926-7
Hutchins, E. (1995). Cognition in the wild. MIT Press. https://mitpress.mit.edu/9780262581462/cognition-in-the-wild/
Karataş, F., & Ataç, B. A. (2025). When TPACK meets artificial intelligence: Analyzing TPACK and AI-TPACK components through structural equation modelling. Education and Information Technologies, 30, 8979-9004. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-13164-2
Kasneci, E., Seßler, K., Küchemann, S., Bannert, M., Dementieva, D., Fischer, F., Gasser, U., Groh, G., Günnemann, S., Hüllermeier, E., Krusche, S., Kutyniok, G., Michaeli, T., Nerdel, C., Pfeffer, J., Poquet, O., Sailer, M., Schmidt, A., Seidel, T., ... Kasneci, G. (2023). ChatGPT for good? On opportunities and challenges of large language models for education. Learning and Individual Differences, 103, Article 102274. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2023.102274
Kofinas, A. K., Tsay, C. H.-H., & Pike, D. (2025). The impact of generative AI on academic integrity of authentic assessments within a higher education context. British Journal of Educational Technology, 56(6), 2522–2549. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13585
Lee, D., Arnold, M., Srivastava, A., Plastow, K., Strelan, P., Ploeckl, F., Lekkas, D., & Palmer, E. (2024). The impact of generative AI on higher education learning and teaching: A study of educators’ perspectives. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 6, Article 100221. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2024.100221
Licklider, J. C. R. (1960). Man-computer symbiosis. IRE Transactions on Human Factors in Electronics, HFE-1(1), 4–11. https://doi.org/10.1109/THFE2.1960.4503259
Merrill, M. D. (2002). First principles of instruction. Educational Technology Research and Development, 50(3), 43–59. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02505024
Mimoudi, A., & Mokhtari, K. (2025). “AIA-PCEK”: A new framework for teaching with AI. Cogent Education, 12(1), Article 2563171. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2025.2563171
Molenaar, I. (2022). Towards hybrid human-AI learning technologies. European Journal of Education, 57(4), 632–645. https://doi.org/10.1111/ejed.12527
Morello, L. T., & Chick, J. C. (2025). Human-AI symbiotic theory (HAIST): Development, multi-framework assessment, and AI-assisted validation in academic research. Informatics, 12(3), Article 85. https://doi.org/10.3390/informatics12030085
Newen, A., De Bruin, L., & Gallagher, S. (Eds.). (2018). The Oxford handbook of 4E cognition. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198735410.001.0001
Paul, R., & Elder, L. (2006). Critical thinking: Tools for taking charge of your learning and your life (2nd ed.). Pearson/Prentice Hall.
Pérez Gómez, Á. I. (2024). La revolución pedagógica de la IA educativa. Márgenes, Revista de Educación de la Universidad de Málaga, 5(2), 220–235. https://doi.org/10.24310/mar.5.2.2024.20485
Perkins, M., Furze, L., Roe, J., & MacVaugh, J. (2024). The Artificial Intelligence Assessment Scale (AIAS): A framework for ethical integration of generative AI in educational assessment. Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice, 21(6), Article 6. https://doi.org/10.53761/q3azde36
Pietarinen, A.-V. J., & Shi, S. (2026). Manipulation and deception in generative AI-mediated education: Preserving epistemic agency, critical thinking, and creativity. Postdigital Science and Education. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42438-026-00644-6
Reigeluth, C. M. (Ed.). (1999). Instructional-design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory (Vol. 2). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Romiszowski, A. J. (1981). Designing instructional systems: Decision making in course planning and curriculum design. Kogan Page.
Samuel, A. (2026). Learning with machines: Toward a theory of epistemic co-agency. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 10, Article 100573. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2026.100573
Tan, X., Cheng, K. S., & Ling, M. H. A. (2025). Artificial intelligence in teaching and teacher professional development: A systematic review. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 8, Article 100355. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2024.100355
Tankelevitch, L., Kewenig, V., Simkute, A., Scott, A. E., Sarkar, A., Sellen, A., & Rintel, S. (2024). The metacognitive demands and opportunities of generative AI. In Proceedings of the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Article 680, pp. 1–24). Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/3613904.3642902
UNESCO. (2024). AI competency framework for teachers. https://doi.org/10.54675/ZJTE2084
Vendrell, M., & Johnston, S.-K. (2026). Scaffolding critical thinking with generative AI: Design principles for integrating large language models in higher education. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 10, Article 100572. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2026.100572
Wu, J.-Y., Lee, Y.-H., Chai, C. S., & Tsai, C.-C. (2025). Strengthening human epistemic agency in the symbiotic learning partnership with generative artificial intelligence. Educational Researcher, 54(6), 358–368. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X251333628
Xia, Q., Weng, X., Ouyang, F., Lin, T. J., & Chiu, T. K. F. (2024). A scoping review on how generative artificial intelligence transforms assessment in higher education. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 21, Article 40. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-024-00468-z
Xie, Z., & Fang, S. (2025). Building a «symbiotic learning» model for AI integration in art and design education. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Intelligent Education and Computer Technology (IECT ’25) (pp. 216–221). Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/3764206.3764238
Yang, T., & Jiang, J. (2024). Realizing augmenting technology–human symbiosis: A qualitative examination from the organizational learning perspective. SAGE Open, 14(4), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Manuel Area-Moreira
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish in this journal accept the following conditions:
Authors retain copyright over their works and grant the journal the right of first publication. Articles are published under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0), which allows third parties to share, copy, distribute, publicly communicate, adapt, transform, and reuse the work in any medium or format, including for commercial purposes, provided that authorship is properly acknowledged, the original source is cited, a link to the license is included, and any changes made are indicated. Note: This license applies to articles published from Vol. 25, No. 2, 2026 onwards.
Authors may enter into separate and additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the published version of the article —for example, its deposit in an institutional repository or its subsequent inclusion in a book—, provided that it is clearly stated that the work was first published in this journal.
Authors are permitted and encouraged to deposit and disseminate their work on the Internet, for example, in institutional repositories, institutional websites, or personal websites before, during, and after the review and publication process, as this may foster scholarly exchange, increase the visibility of the work, and enable broader and faster dissemination of the published research.
