Sanctioned AI as a Pedagogical Tool: a Quasi-Experiment on the Formation of a New Academic Subjectivity

Introduction. With the spread of generative AI (GenAI) in education, discussions on the “crisis of authorship” intensified. While most measures focus on prohibition, this paper examines how student subjectivity changes when AI is legitimized. It explores how interdictive (prohibition) and prescriptive (mandatory use with verification) attitudes modulate behavioral strategies, academic ethics, and responsibility.

Methodology and sources. A controlled quasi-experiment (n = 10) was conducted within bachelor's thesis projects. Students were divided into two didactically isolated groups: mandatory conscious AI use versus an interdictive framework. Data collection included document analysis, reflective surveys, pedagogical observation, and verification metrics. Special attention was paid to correlating formal indicators and subjective interpretations.

Results and discussion. Data demonstrate an association between AI legitimization and process-oriented ethics. The prescriptive group declared higher authorship, reduced ethical discomfort, and developed critical verification practices. Conversely, the interdictive group showed uncritical borrowing. Prohibition failed to stimulate autonomous ethical reflection. Legitimized AI catalyzed cognitive activity, transforming subjectivity from task performer to designer of the epistemic environment.

Conclusion. Prohibiting GenAI fails to strengthen ethical responsibility, potentially promoting passive trust. Normative AI integration transforms academic subjectivity: the student becomes a “prompt designer”, “model operator”, and “arbiter of knowledge”. This requires rethinking educational practices and fundamental categories of authorship, responsibility, and competence.

1. Glukhikh, V.A., Eliseev, S.M. and Kirsanova, N.P. (2022), “Artificial Intelligence as a Problem of Modern Sociology”, DISCOURSE, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 82–93. DOI: 10.32603/2412-8562-2022-8-1-82-93

2. Ilyichev, V.Yu., Drach, V.E. and Chukaev, K.E. (2023), “Moral and Ethical Problems of Universal Use of Neural Networks”, Refleksiya, no. 5, pp. 8–13.

3. Kopyrin, A.S., Vidishcheva, E.V., Kovalenko, V.V. et al. (2023), Tsifrovaya ekonomika i sistemnaya tsifrovaya transformatsiya [Digital Economy and Systemic Digital Transformation], in Kopyrin, A.S. (ed.), RIC SSU, Sochi, RUS.

4. Drach, V.E. and Torkunova, Yu.V. (2025), “Implementation of Generative Artificial Intelligence in Sociological Research”, DISCOURSE, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 52–70. DOI: 10.32603/2412-8562-2025-11-1-52-70

5. Kosmyna, N., Hauptmann, E., Yuan, Y. et al. (2025), “Your Brain on ChatGPT: Accumulation of Cognitive Debt when Using an AI Assistant for Essay Writing Task”, Arxiv.org. DOI: 10.48550/arXiv.2506.08872

6. Mike, N., Karsai, K., Orbán, G. et al. (2024), The impact of ChatGPT on student performance in higher education, available at: https://publicatio.bibl.u-szeged.hu/34431/1/paper28.pdf (accessed 10.11.2025).

7. Dempere, J., Modugu, K., Allam, H. and Ramasamy, L. (2023), “The impact of ChatGPT on higher education”, Frontiers in Education, vol. 8, pp. 1–13. DOI: 10.3389/feduc.2023.1206936

8. Suchman, M.C. (1995), “Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches”, Academy of Management Review, vol. 20, no. 3, pp. 571–610. DOI: 10.5465/amr.1995.9508080331

9. Pinch, T.J. and Bijker, W.E. (1984), “The social construction of facts and artefacts: Or how the sociology of science and the sociology of technology might benefit each other”, Social Studies of Science, vol. 14, iss. 3, pp. 399–441. DOI: 10.1177/030631284014003004

10. Lea, M.R. and Street, B.V. (1998), “Student writing in higher education: An academic literacies approach”, Studies in Higher Education, vol. 23, iss. 2, pp. 157–172. DOI: 10.1080/03075079812331380364

11. Lillis, T. (2020), “Situating academic literacies”, Academic Literacies: The Public and Private Discourse of University Students, Lillis, T. and Lea, M.R. (eds.), Routledge, London, UK, pp. 1–24.

12. Biesta, G. (2017), The Rediscovery of Teaching: On Rhetoric, Truth, and the Subject of Education, Routledge, London, UK.

13. Ivanko, N.A. (2025), “Artificial intelligence in education: social innovation or cognitive degradation?”, RSUH/RGGU Bulletin. Ser. Literary Theory. Linguistics. Cultural Studies, no. 7, pp. 125–138, DOI: 10.28995/2686-7249-2025-7-125-138

14. Bourdieu, P. (1990), The Logic of Practice, Stanford Univ. Press, Stanford, USA.