Introduction The expanding use of classroom AI tools has made technology integration an increasingly identity-relevant aspect of teachers' work. Framed by psychological perspectives on professional identity, agency, and efficacy beliefs, this study examined whether AI integration in instruction is associated with language teacher identity among high school English teachers, whether professional agency represents an indirect pathway in this association, and whether the association between AI integration and professional agency differs by teachers' AI self-efficacy. Methods A cross-sectional online survey was conducted with 420 in-service high school English teachers. Participants reported their AI integration practices, professional agency, AI self-efficacy for AI-supported teaching, and language teacher identity. Hypotheses were tested using regression-based conditional process analysis with bootstrapped confidence intervals. Results AI integration was positively associated with language teacher identity. Professional agency was positively associated with teacher identity and the indirect association between AI integration and teacher identity through professional agency was statistically significant. Moreover, AI self-efficacy moderated the association between AI integration and professional agency, such that the positive relation was stronger among teachers with higher AI self-efficacy. Consistent with this pattern, the conditional indirect association between AI integration and teacher identity through professional agency increased across levels of AI self-efficacy. Discussion These findings position AI integration as more than a technical practice, highlighting it as a psychologically meaningful context in which teachers enact influence and consolidate their professional self-understanding. The results suggest that supporting teachers in AI-mediated instructional environments requires not only technical guidance but also efforts to strengthen efficacy beliefs and agency-related psychological resources.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Zou et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: