Concept
Stakeholders
Stakeholders — the range of human stakeholders involved in, affected by, and responsible for AI in education, and the umbrella concept for the knowledge base's coverage of who the actors are. AI in education is a multi-stakeholder field: learners who use AI, teachers and faculty who integrate it, administrators who govern it, instructional designers who build learning experiences around it, and policymakers who regulate it. Each audience has distinct needs, competencies, roles, and perspectives, and the knowledge base treats them as the human context in which AI tools are designed, deployed, and evaluated.
Questions to Consider
- The page argues the same AI system looks different from every vantage point — a tool a student experiences as support may look to a teacher like an integrity risk and to an administrator like a governance decision. Which role do you most identify with, and what do you think you're prone to miss from the others?
- Before reading on, try to list everyone in your institution who is touched by an AI-in-education decision — beyond just students and teachers. Who did you forget, and what would each of them care about most?
- If learners, teachers, administrators, instructional designers, and policymakers each have distinct needs and competencies, who should have the final say over how an AI tool is deployed — and why?
- A student's 'personalized support' can simultaneously be a teacher's 'integrity risk.' How would you design a conversation or process that gives each stakeholder's concern genuine weight rather than letting the loudest voice win?
Introduction
AI in education is fundamentally about people — the learners and educators whose work it transforms, and the leaders and designers who decide how it is used. Understanding the distinct stakeholders is essential because the same AI system looks very different from different vantage points: a tool a student experiences as personalized support may appear to a teacher as an integrity risk, to an administrator as a procurement and governance decision, and to a designer as a pedagogical choice. The knowledge base organizes coverage of these audiences across several concept pages.
The stakeholder landscape
- Learners (students). The primary audience — students in K-12, Higher Education, and Adult Learners. The knowledge base covers learners through Student Experience, Student Engagement, Misconceptions about AI, Learner Modeling and Adaptive Instruction, Well-Being, and Learner Agency. Learners' AI AI Literacy, self-regulation (Self-Regulated Learning), and risk of over-reliance are central concerns.
- Teachers and faculty. Educators who integrate AI into instruction. Covered by Teaching, Teacher AI Competency, Professional Development, Educational Development, and Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK). Teachers face the dual challenge of using AI in their own teaching and teaching students to use it responsibly (see pedagogies and teaching strategies).
- Instructional designers and learning technologists. The professionals who design courses, curricula, and learning experiences around AI. Related to Learning Design (the discipline) and Curriculum Design, though the people/role of instructional designer is not yet a dedicated page — it is grouped here.
- Administrators and institutional leaders. Provosts, deans, CIOs, and leaders who set policy, allocate resources, and govern adoption. Covered by Administrators, and connected to Educational AI Policy, AI Governance, and AI Regulation in Education.
- Policymakers and regulators. Government and institutional bodies that set the legal and regulatory framework. Related to Educational AI Policy, AI Regulation in Education, and AI Governance.
- Parents and families. Present in the research (e.g., monitoring student AI use, attitudes toward AI) and now covered by a dedicated page — grouped here as a stakeholder.
How stakeholders appear in the research
-
Role-specific competency frameworks. Teacher AI Competency and Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) define what teachers need to use AI effectively; AI Literacy defines what all audiences (especially students) need.
-
Differential impacts by role. Research examines how AI affects different audiences differently — Student Experience studies student outcomes, Teaching studies pedagogical integration, Administrators studies institutional strategy, and Educational Development studies professional learning.
-
Multi-stakeholder governance. AI Governance and Educational AI Policy research emphasizes aligning national, institutional, and classroom stakeholders — policymakers set expectations, administrators implement, teachers adapt, and students experience the result.
-
Equity across audiences. Equity examines how AI's benefits and harms distribute across learners and institutions, connecting stakeholders to fairness and access.
-
Role differences can be asserted more easily than observed. A SWOT of 167 contributions from 152 higher-education personnel found teachers, researchers and administrators converging on the same strengths and threats, while fully anonymous collection left roles unidentifiable, so the study could not test its plan to contrast them (Humble & Mozelius, 2026).
Identity across audiences
A common thread across these stakeholders is identity — the sense of who one is and is becoming in relation to AI and to the domain. The knowledge base treats identity as distributed across audiences rather than belonging to any single group.
- Learner identity — the evolving disciplinary, professional, creative, and academic identity of students (Learner Identity). It is distinct from, but causally connected to, Learner Agency: agency is the situated capacity to act, while identity is the durable sense of self that accumulates from agentic acts and is threatened by authorship loss and competence doubt under AI.
- Teacher identity — the professional self-understanding of educators (Teaching), reshaped by AI as a question of purpose and role rather than skills alone (see GenAI as identity crisis).
- Designers and leaders — professional identity also shapes how instructional designers, administrators, and policymakers orient to AI, though the knowledge base's explicit identity coverage concentrates on learners and teachers.
Identity is the human anchor of the stakeholder landscape: it is what AI must support (not erode) for each audience, and it is the construct that connects otherwise separate role pages — Learner Identity, Learner Agency, and Teaching in particular. Where agency concerns control and identity concerns self, AI design must preserve both: control over one's learning and a robust, authorial sense of who one is in the domain.
Implications for AI in education
- Design for the full stakeholder set: effective AI in education must serve learners, support teachers, inform administrators, and align with policy — not just optimize one audience.
- Build role-specific competencies: teachers, students, designers, and leaders each need tailored AI literacy and support (see AI Literacy, Teacher AI Competency, Educational Development).
- Align across levels: the knowledge base's governance research shows AI succeeds when institutional leadership, teacher practice, and student experience are aligned rather than fragmented.
- Consider parents and the broader community: families are stakeholders in AI adoption whose role and concerns deserve explicit attention.
Connected Concepts
- Learners — Learners: the umbrella for the learner-side concepts
- Teaching
- Learner Identity
- Learner Agency
- Teacher AI Competency
- Professional Development
- Educational Development
- Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK)
- Student Experience
- Student Engagement
- Misconceptions about AI
- Administrators
- Learning Design
- Curriculum Design
- Educational AI Policy
- AI Governance
- AI Literacy
- Equity
- Higher Education
- K-12
- Adult Learners
- Parents and Families
- Student Support and Success — who holds a claim on institutional AI support decisions
Connected Articles
- "It is a temptation to get it to do the work…" Student Experiences of Navigating the Generative AI Landscape in UK Higher Education: A Cross-Institutional Survey with International Comparison — Student experiences of GenAI in UK higher education
- Artificial Intelligence in UK Higher Educational Policy and Institutional Decision Making — AI in UK higher-education policy (students and institutions)
- New AI-Driven Tools for Enhancing Campus Well-being: A Prevention and Intervention Approach — AI-driven tools for campus well-being
- Assessing AI-TPACK readiness in mathematics teacher education: The role of self-efficacy and teaching beliefs — AI-TPACK readiness in mathematics teacher education
- A Comparative Analysis of Institutional and Course Generative AI Policies within Higher Education: Implications for Instruction in Computing Education — Institutional GenAI policy in computing
- Mathematical Modelling of Ethical AI Use in Higher Education: A Coordination Game Framework for Future-Facing Learning — Coordination game framework for ethical AI use in higher education
- It's OK Because...": The Wild West of Student Rationalization of AI Use in Academic Writing — Student rationalization of AI use in academic writing
- How AI Is Changing Teaching Workflows — How AI is changing teaching workflows
- Beyond the Hype: How Higher Education Stakeholders View the Benefits and Concerns of Generative AI for Teaching, Research, and Administration — Stakeholder perceptions of GenAI in higher ed (Humble & Mozelius 2026)
- "We'll Fix It Later": Education, AI, and the Deferral of Student Privacy in EdTech — "We'll Fix It Later": Education, AI, and the Deferral of Student Privacy in EdTech