A Philosophical Explanation of Teachers’ Moral Responsibility in the Use of Intelligent Educational Systems: A Thematic Analysis

Abstract

This study aimed to philosophically explain the dimensions and components of teachers’ moral responsibility in the use of intelligent educational systems. This fundamental qualitative study employed thematic analysis within an interpretive framework. The participants were 20 experts and practitioners from Tehran, including five faculty members in philosophy of education, four specialists in ethics and professional ethics, four experts in educational technology and artificial intelligence, and seven teachers with practical experience in using intelligent educational systems. Participants were recruited through purposive maximum-variation sampling, and data collection continued until conceptual saturation was achieved. Data were gathered through in-depth semi-structured interviews lasting 45–75 minutes. The interviews were transcribed verbatim and analyzed concurrently with data collection. MAXQDA 2024 was used to organize and manage the qualitative data. The credibility of the findings was enhanced through member checking, peer review, constant comparison, documentation of the analytical process, and reflexive note-taking. Analysis of the interviews generated 368 initial codes. After removing duplicate codes and integrating conceptually similar items, the data were organized into 112 conceptual codes, 21 subthemes, and seven overarching themes. The themes were preservation of teachers’ moral agency and professional autonomy, protection of student dignity and best interests, justice and resistance to algorithmic discrimination, responsibility for data protection and privacy, transparency and accountability in technology-mediated decisions, preservation of human relationships and the educational nature of teaching, and teachers’ ethical competence and critical artificial-intelligence literacy. Teachers’ moral responsibility in intelligent educational environments is multidimensional, contextual, relational, and non-delegable. Intelligent educational systems are ethically legitimate only when they remain subject to human judgment and are used to protect student dignity, justice, privacy, and holistic development.