Keywords
teacher shortage
large language models
text-to-speech
representative communication
AI literacy
ethics
How to Cite
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Stefan Pietrusky
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Abstract
This article develops «substitute communication» as a heuristic and analytical concept for describing and evaluating the use of LLM-based systems in school settings where teacher availability is limited. It does not assume that teaching can be technically substituted. Instead, it asks which communicative sub-functions digital systems may support, where professional responsibility remains indispensable, and which normative limits need to be observed. Educational communication is considered on three levels: information transfer, relationship building, as well as individual support and feedback. Building on this distinction, the typology differentiates between (1) complete replacement communication as a heuristic boundary case, (2) supportive assistance communication, and (3) supplementary communication. The article distinguishes this concept from intelligent tutoring systems, digital learning assistance, and the SAMR model, cautiously contextualizes selective indicative evidence, and discusses risks such as bias, data protection issues, delegation drift, and anthropomorphic attribution. The locally operated Individual Educational Chatbot (IEC) is presented as an illustrative design prototype. The argument leads to guidelines for data protection, fairness, transparency, autonomy, clear relational boundaries, and institutionally secured responsibility.
References
Alkhatlan, Ali, und Jugal Kalita. 2018. «Intelligent tutoring systems: A comprehensive historical survey with recent developments». Preprint. arXiv. https://arxiv.org/abs/1812.09628.
Baumert, Jürgen, Mareike Kunter, Werner Blum, Martin Brunner, Thamar Voss, Alexander Jordan, Uta Klusmann, Stefan Krauss, Michael Neubrand, und Yi-Miau Tsai. 2010. «Teachers’ mathematical knowledge, cognitive activation in the classroom, and student progress». American Educational Research Journal 47 (1): 133 – 80. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831209345157.
Bender, Emily M., Timnit Gebru, Angelina McMillan-Major, und Shmargaret Shmitchell. 2021. «On the dangers of stochastic parrots: Can language models be too big?» In Proceedings of the 2021 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, 610 – 23. New York: Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/3442188.3445922.
Black, Paul, und Dylan Wiliam. 1998. «Assessment and classroom learning». Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice 5 (1): 7 – 74. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969595980050102.
Cornelius-White, Jeffrey H. D. 2007. «Learner-centered teacher-student relationships are effective: A meta-analysis». Review of Educational Research 77 (1): 113 – 43. https://doi.org/10.3102/003465430298563.
Dohmen, Dieter. 2024. Lehrkräftemangel! Und kein Ende in Sicht (FiBS-Forum Nr. 79). Berlin: Forschungsinstitut für Bildungs- und Sozialökonomie (FiBS).
Dzindolet, Mary T., H. Patrick Beck, Leigh G. Pierce, und Lisa A. Dawe. 2003. «The role of trust in automation reliance». International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 58 (6): 697 – 718. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1071-5819(03)00038-7.
Esposito, Elena. 2024. Kommunikation mit unverständlichen Maschinen. Wien, Salzburg: Residenz-Verlag.
Fischer, Mira, Holger A. Rau, und Rainer Michael Rilke. 2025. «AI tutoring enhances student learning without crowding out reading effort». IZA Discussion Paper No. 18338. https://docs.iza.org/dp18338.pdf.
Geis-Thöne, Wido. 2022. Lehrkräftebedarf und -angebot bis 2035: Szenariorechnungen zum INSM-Bildungsmonitor (Gutachten für die INSM). Köln: Institut der deutschen Wirtschaft Köln e. V.
Guizani, Sana, Talha Mazhar, Taimoor Shahzad, Waseem Ahmad, Aisha Bibi, und Hakim Hamam. 2025. «A systematic literature review to implement large language model in higher education: Issues and solutions». Discover Education 4 (Article 35). https://doi.org/10.1007/s44217-025-00424-7.
Habermas, Jürgen. 1981. Theorie des kommunikativen Handelns. 2 Bde. Frankfurt a. M.
Hamilton, Erica R., Joshua M. Rosenberg, und Mete Akcaoglu. 2016. «The substitution augmentation modification redefinition (SAMR) model: A critical review and suggestions for its use». TechTrends 60 (5): 433 – 41. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-016-0091-y.
Hamre, Bridget K., Robert C. Pianta, Jason T. Downer, Jamie DeCoster, Andrew J. Mashburn, Stephanie M. Jones, Julia L. Brown, Emily Cappella, Marc Atkins, Sandra E. Rivers, Marc A. Brackett, und Atsushi Hamagami. 2013. «Teaching through interactions: Testing a developmental framework of teacher effectiveness in over 4,000 classrooms». The Elementary School Journal 113 (4): 461 – 87. https://doi.org/10.1086/669616.
Harvey, Emma, Allison Koenecke, und René F. Kizilcec. 2025. «Don’t forget the teachers: Towards an educator-centered understanding of harms from large language models in education». In Proceedings of the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI ’25). https://doi.org/10.1145/3706598.3713210.
Hattie, John, und Helen Timperley. 2007. «The power of feedback». Review of Educational Research 77 (1): 81 – 112. https://doi.org/10.3102/003465430298487.
Helsper, Werner. 2021. Professionalität und Professionalisierung pädagogischen Handelns: Eine Einführung. Opladen und Toronto: Barbara Budrich. https://doi.org/10.36198/9783838554600.
Hepp, Andreas, und Uwe Hasebrink. 2017. «Kommunikative Figurationen. Ein konzeptioneller Rahmen zur Erforschung kommunikativer Konstruktionsprozesse in Zeiten tiefgreifender Mediatisierung». Medien & Kommunikationswissenschaft 65 (2): 330 – 47. https://doi.org/10.5771/1615-634X-2017-2-330.
Hepp, Andreas, Wiebke Loosen, Stephan Dreyer, Julian Jarke, Sabine Kannengießer, Christian Katzenbach, Rainer Malaka, Michaela Pfadenhauer, Cornelius Puschmann, und Wolfgang Schulz. 2022. «Von der Mensch-Maschine-Interaktion zur kommunikativen KI: Automatisierung von Kommunikation als Gegenstand der Kommunikations- und Medienforschung». Publizistik 67 (4): 449 – 74. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11616-022-00758-4.
Jörissen, Benjamin, und Winfried Marotzki. 2009. Medienbildung – eine Einführung: Theorie – Methoden – Analysen. Bad Heilbrunn: Klinkhardt.
Kasneci, Enkelejda, Katharina Sessler, Stefan Küchemann, Maria Bannert, Darja Dementieva, Frank Fischer, Urs Gasser, Georg Groh, Stephan Günnemann, Eyke Hüllermeier, Stephan Krusche, Gitta Kutyniok, Tomer Michaeli, Christian Nerdel, Jürgen Pfeffer, Oleksandra Poquet, Michael Sailer, Andreas Schmidt, Tina Seidel, Matthias Stadler, Jörg Weller, Johannes Kuhn, und Gabriele Kasneci. 2023. «ChatGPT for good? On opportunities and challenges of large language models for education». Learning and Individual Differences 103: 102274. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2023.102274.
Kestin, Greg, Kelly Miller, Anna Klales, Timothy Milbourne, Fadel Reif, et al. 2025. «AI tutoring outperforms in-class active learning: An RCT introducing a novel research-based design in an authentic educational setting». Scientific Reports 15 (Article 17458). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-97652-6.
Klemm, Klaus. 2022. Entwicklung von Lehrkräftebedarf und -angebot in Deutschland bis 2035 (Gutachten im Auftrag des Verbandes Bildung und Erziehung). Frankfurt a. M.: Verband Bildung und Erziehung.
Klemm, Klaus, und Dirk Zorn. 2024. Weniger Geburten, mehr Lehrkräfte: Spielraum für die Grundschulentwicklung. Gütersloh: Bertelsmann Stiftung.
Klieme, Eckhard, Christina Pauli, und Kurt Reusser. 2009. «The Pythagoras study: Investigating effects of teaching and learning in Swiss and German mathematics classrooms». In The power of video studies in investigating teaching and learning in the classroom, herausgegeben von Tomáš Janík und Tina Seidel, 137 – 60. Münster: Waxmann.
Kluger, Avraham N., und Angelo DeNisi. 1996. «The effects of feedback interventions on performance: A historical review, a meta-analysis, and a preliminary feedback intervention theory». Psychological Bulletin 119 (2): 254 – 84. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.119.2.254.
Kulik, James A., und J. D. Fletcher. 2016. «Effectiveness of intelligent tutoring systems: A meta-analytic review». Review of Educational Research 86 (1): 42 – 78. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654315581420.
Lewis, Patrick, Ethan Perez, Aleksandra Piktus, Fabio Petroni, Vladimir Karpukhin, Naman Goyal, Heinrich Küttler, Mike Lewis, Wen-tau Yih, Tim Rocktäschel, Sebastian Riedel, und Douwe Kiela. 2020. «Retrieval-augmented generation for knowledge-intensive NLP tasks». arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2005.11401.
Long, Duri, und Brian Magerko. 2020. «What is AI literacy? Competencies and design considerations». In Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 1 – 16. New York: Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/3313831.3376727.
Luhmann, Niklas. 1981. «Die Unwahrscheinlichkeit der Kommunikation». In Soziologische Aufklärung 3: Soziales System, Gesellschaft, Organisation, 25 – 34.
Mascheroni, Giovanna, und Andra Siibak. 2021. Datafied childhoods. Bern: Peter Lang. https://doi.org/10.3726/b17460.
Nass, Clifford, und Youngme Moon. 2000. «Machines and mindlessness: Social responses to computers». Journal of Social Issues 56 (1): 81 – 103. https://doi.org/10.1111/0022-4537.00153.
National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). 2023. Artificial Intelligence Risk Management Framework (AI RMF 1.0) (NIST AI 100-1). https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/ai/nist.ai.100-1.pdf.
Ng, Daniel T. K., Jessica K. L. Leung, Kevin W. S. Chu, und Maggie S. Qiao. 2021. «Conceptualizing AI literacy: An exploratory review». Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence 2: 100041. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2021.100041.
Oevermann, Ulrich. 1996. «Theoretische Skizze einer revidierten Theorie professionalisierten Handelns». In Pädagogische Professionalität: Untersuchungen zum Typus pädagogischen Handelns, herausgegeben von Arno Combe und Werner Helsper, 70 – 182. Frankfurt a. M.: Suhrkamp.
Parasuraman, Raja, und Victor Riley. 1997. «Humans and automation: Use, misuse, disuse, abuse». Human Factors 39 (2): 230 – 53. https://doi.org/10.1518/001872097778543886.
Pardos, Zachary A., und Shreya Bhandari. 2024. «ChatGPT-generated help produces learning gains equivalent to human tutor-authored help on mathematics skills». PLOS ONE 19 (5): e0304013. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0304013.
Peter, Sandra, Kai Riemer, und Jevin D. West. 2025. «The benefits and dangers of anthropomorphic conversational agents». Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 122 (22): e2415898122. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2415898122.
Pianta, Robert C., Karen M. La Paro, und Bridget K. Hamre. 2008. Classroom Assessment Scoring System (CLASS) manual, K-3. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.
Pietrusky, Stefan. 2024. «Promoting AI literacy in higher education: Evaluating the IEC-V1 chatbot for personalized learning and educational equity». Preprint. arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2412.16165.
Pietrusky, Stefan. 2025. INDIVIDUAL EDUCATIONAL CHATBOT (IEC) V2 (Version 1.0.0) [Computer software]. https://github.com/stefanpietrusky/IEC.
Placani, Adriana. 2024. «Anthropomorphism in AI: Hype and fallacy». AI and Ethics. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43681-024-00419-4.
Praetorius, Anna-Katharina, Eckhard Klieme, Benjamin Herbert, und Pia Pinger. 2018. «Generic dimensions of teaching quality: The German framework of Three Basic Dimensions». ZDM Mathematics Education 50 (3): 407 – 26. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-018-0918-4.
Puentedura, Ruben R. 2006. «Transformation, Technology, and Education». Präsentation im Rahmen der Workshops Strengthening Your District Through Technology, 18. August. Hippasus. Zugriff am 3. Juni 2026. https://hippasus.com/resources/tte/.
Rackles, Mark. 2024. Maßnahmen gegen den Lehrkräftemangel 2024: Systematisierung bisheriger Vorschläge und Praxisansätze sowie Bewertung für 20 Einzelmaßnahmen. GEW / Max-Traeger-Stiftung. https://www.gew.de/fileadmin/media/publikationen/hv/Schule/Lehrerarbeitsmarkt/20240916-GEW-MTS-Studie-Massnahmen-gegen-Lehrkraeftemangel-web-final.pdf.
Roorda, Debora L., Helma M. Y. Koomen, Janneke L. Spilt, und Frans J. Oort. 2011. «The influence of affective teacher–student relationships on students’ school engagement and achievement: A meta-analytic approach». Review of Educational Research 81 (4): 493 – 529. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654311421793.
Sekretariat der Ständigen Konferenz der Kultusminister der Länder in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland (KMK). 2025. Lehrkräfteeinstellungsbedarf und -angebot in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland 2024 – 2035 (Dokumentation Nr. 2). Statistische Veröffentlichungen der Kultusministerkonferenz. https://urlz.fr/v2iE.
Shavelson, Richard J., D. Brian Young, C. C. Ayala, Paul R. Brandon, Erin M. Furtak, María A. Ruiz-Primo, Mary K. Tomita, und Yao Yin. 2008. «On the impact of curriculum embedded formative assessment on learning: A collaboration between curriculum and assessment developers». Applied Measurement in Education 21 (4): 295 – 314. https://doi.org/10.1080/08957340802347647.
Shi, Yuhong, Kun Yu, Yifei Dong, und Fang Chen. 2025. «Large language models in education: A systematic review of empirical applications, benefits, and challenges». Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence 10: 100529. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2025.100529.
Shute, Valerie J. 2008. «Focus on formative feedback». Review of Educational Research 78 (1): 153 – 89. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654307313795.
Spanhel, Dieter. 2011. «Medienbildung als Grundbegriff der Medienpädagogik: Begriffliche Grundlagen für eine Theorie der Medienpädagogik». In Medienbildung und Medienkompetenz: Beiträge zu Schlüsselbegriffen der Medienpädagogik, herausgegeben von Heinz Moser, Petra Grell, und Horst Niesyto, 95 – 120. München: kopaed.
Statistisches Bundesamt (Destatis). 2025a. «Gut jede zehnte Lehrkraft an allgemeinbildenden Schulen war im Schuljahr 2023/24 Quer- oder Seiteneinsteigerin und -einsteiger» (Pressemitteilung Nr. N030, 4. Juni). https://urlz.fr/v2iN.
Statistisches Bundesamt (Destatis). 2025b. «Teilzeitquote bei Lehrkräften an allgemeinbildenden Schulen auf 43,1 Prozent im Schuljahr 2023/24 gestiegen» (Pressemitteilung Nr. N042, 13. August). https://urlz.fr/v2iO.
Thomas, Danielle R., Conrad Borchers, Shambhavi Bhushan, Erin Gatz, Shivang Gupta, und Kenneth R. Koedinger. 2025. «LLM-generated feedback supports learning if learners choose to use it». arXiv. https://arxiv.org/abs/2506.17006.
Tulodziecki, Gerhard, Bardo Herzig, und Silke Grafe. 2021. Medienbildung in Schule und Unterricht: Grundlagen und Beispiele. 3., vollständig überarbeitete und aktualisierte Auflage. Bad Heilbrunn/Stuttgart: Julius Klinkhardt/UTB. https://doi.org/10.36198/9783838557465.
UNESCO. 2023. Guidance for generative AI in education and research. Paris: UNESCO. https://doi.org/10.54675/EWZM9535.
van Dijck, José, Thomas Poell, und Martijn de Waal. 2018. The platform society: Public values in a connective world. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190889760.001.0001.
Wang, Rose E., Ana T. Ribeiro, Carly D. Robinson, Susanna Loeb, and Dorottya Demszky. (2025). «Tutor CoPilot: A Human-AI Approach for Scaling Real-Time Expertise». EdWorkingPaper No. 24-1056. Retrieved from Annenberg Institute at Brown University: https://doi.org/10.26300/81nh-8262.
Weidinger, Laura, Lisa Anne Hendricks, Laura Rimell, William Isaac, Jeffrey Haas, Seán Legassick, Georg Irving, und Iason Gabriel. 2022. «Taxonomy of risks posed by language models». In Proceedings of the 2022 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency. New York: Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/3531146.3533088.
Yaseen, Husam, Abdelaziz Saleh Mohammad, Najwa Ashal, Hesham Abusaimeh, Ahmad Ali, und Abdel-Aziz Ahmad Sharabati. 2025. «The impact of adaptive learning technologies, personalized feedback, and interactive AI tools on student engagement: The moderating role of digital literacy». Sustainability 17 (3): 1133. https://doi.org/10.3390/su17031133.
Zawacki-Richter, Olaf, Victoria I. Marín, Melissa Bond, und Franziska Gouverneur. 2019. «Systematic review of research on artificial intelligence applications in higher education: Where are the educators?» International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education 16 (Article 39). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-019-0171-0.