Education is currently in a state of absolute, unbridled chaos. If you walk into any staff room right now, you aren't going to hear about lesson plans or grading rubrics; you're going to hear about ChatGPT. Specifically, you're going to hear about whether or not we should just give up on homework entirely. It’s messy. That’s exactly why everyone is looking for a teaching with AI book that actually makes sense of the noise without sounding like a Silicon Valley sales pitch.
The reality is that most of the "guides" floating around the internet were written by people who haven't stepped foot in a K-12 classroom since the Blackberry was a status symbol. They tell you to "embrace the future" but don't explain what to do when a sophomore turns in a flawless essay on The Great Gatsby that uses words like "myriad" and "heretofore" despite the kid having a third-grade reading level. We need real talk.
🔗 Read more: Shot in the Moon: Why We Still Can’t Stop Hitting the Lunar Surface
The One Teaching with AI Book Everyone is Actually Citing
If you’ve been paying attention to the academic space, you’ve likely seen the name José Antonio Bowen or C. Edward Watson. Their book, Teaching with AI: A Practical Guide to a New Era of Education, has basically become the unofficial manual for universities and high schools trying to survive this transition. It’s not just a collection of "cool prompts" you can copy and paste. Honestly, it’s more of a philosophical toolkit.
They focus on something they call "AI-enhanced" vs. "AI-resistant" assignments. It’s a brilliant distinction. Most teachers are stuck in the "AI-resistant" phase, trying to create "cheat-proof" tests. Good luck with that. You're fighting a losing war against an algorithm that updates every six months. Bowen and Watson argue that we should be leaning into the "AI-enhanced" side, where the tool is part of the process, not the final product.
For instance, they suggest using AI to generate multiple perspectives on a historical event. You don't just ask the AI "what happened?" You ask it to simulate a debate between a 19th-century industrialist and a factory worker. Then, the student’s job isn't to write the facts; their job is to critique the AI’s logic and find the factual errors the bot inevitably made. That is how you teach critical thinking in 2026.
Why "Prompt Engineering" is Mostly a Distraction
You’ve probably seen those "Mega-Prompts" that are three pages long. Forget them. They’re overkill for 90% of what a teacher needs to do. In a classroom, you don't need a perfect prompt; you need a perfect interaction.
The best way to think about it? It’s a teaching assistant that is incredibly fast but also kinda prone to lying when it gets embarrassed.
If you’re looking through a teaching with AI book, look for the ones that emphasize "Socratic prompting." Instead of telling the AI to "Write a lesson plan about photosynthesis," you tell it: "I am teaching 7th graders who think science is boring. Give me three hooks involving TikTok trends that explain how plants eat sunlight." See the difference? You're the expert. The AI is just the brainstormer.
The Equity Problem Nobody Wants to Mention
We have to talk about the "Digital Divide 2.0." It’s a massive issue. If a school district bans AI on campus, but the wealthy kids have parents who pay for ChatGPT Plus and Claude Pro at home, we aren't "protecting" anyone. We’re just widening the gap.
Ethan Mollick, a professor at Wharton and author of Co-Intelligence, is very vocal about this. He’s another heavy hitter in the world of AI education literature. He argues that we have a moral obligation to teach students how to use these tools because, frankly, their future employers will demand it. If you graduate a student today who doesn't know how to fact-check an LLM, you haven't prepared them for the workforce. You've sent them out with a typewriter in a world of cloud computing.
Moving Beyond the "Plagiarism" Panic
Look, the panic is real. I get it. It’s soul-crushing to spend hours grading something that a machine spit out in four seconds. But the focus on detection is a dead end.
- AI detectors (like GPTZero or Turnitin’s AI tool) are notoriously unreliable for short-form text.
- False positives are destroying the teacher-student relationship.
- Students are already using "humanizers" to bypass the detectors.
Instead of being a detective, be a coach. Change the venue. More oral exams. More in-class writing with pen and paper (yes, really). More "process-based" grading where you see the outline, the rough draft, and the edit history. If you only grade the final PDF, you’re inviting the bot into your classroom. If you grade the thinking, the bot becomes irrelevant.
Real Examples of AI Success Stories
I spoke with a high school English teacher recently who used AI to help her ESL students. These kids had brilliant ideas but struggled with English syntax. She let them write their thoughts in their native language, used AI to translate and refine the structure, and then had the students "back-translate" it to ensure the meaning stayed true. They weren't "cheating" on the writing; they were using a bridge to access the curriculum.
Another teacher in Ohio uses AI to generate "bad" essays. He has the students grade the AI's work. They have to find the hallucinations, the repetitive sentence structures, and the lack of specific evidence. It’s the ultimate "Reverse Turing Test."
Actionable Steps for Next Monday
Don't try to overhaul your entire syllabus over the weekend. That’s a recipe for burnout.
Start small. Pick one lesson—just one—and ask yourself: "How could a student use AI to bypass the thinking here?" If the answer is "easily," then change the prompt. Ask for local connections. Ask for personal reflections that relate to a specific classroom discussion that happened on Tuesday. AI doesn't know what happened in your room on Tuesday. That's your "human" advantage.
Next, get a copy of a solid teaching with AI book like the ones by Bowen/Watson or Mollick. Read the chapters on "Assignment Design" specifically. You don't need the tech history; you need the pedagogy.
Finally, be transparent with your students. Tell them why you're using it or why you're banning it for a specific task. If they understand the "why," they’re much less likely to treat your class like a game of "catch me if you can."
Your Immediate Action Plan:
- Run your next assignment through ChatGPT. See what it produces. If the result is a B+, your assignment is too generic.
- Create an "AI Policy" for your syllabus. Don't just say "No AI." Define where it’s allowed (brainstorming, outlining) and where it’s a "no-fly zone" (final drafting, data analysis).
- Focus on "The Human Element." Double down on the things AI can't do: empathy, physical labs, collaborative group work, and nuanced debate.
- Check out the "AI for Educators" community on LinkedIn or X. The best "book" is often the collective wisdom of teachers currently in the trenches.
The goal isn't to become a tech expert. You’re already a learning expert. AI is just a new, very weird, very fast tool in your shed. Treat it like a calculator for words—useful if you know the math, but dangerous if you don't.