The conversation about AI in educator preparation has quietly shifted. A few years ago, the central question was whether AI had any place in clinical supervision at all. Today, most EPP faculty and program directors have moved past that debate. The question now is which tools can actually be trusted within the work.
That distinction matters more than it might seem. Not every AI tool is built the same way. A tool that generates a talking-point summary is different from one that surfaces objective behavioral data to support a structured debrief. One replaces judgment, while the other informs it.
We explored this in a recent article for AACTE's Ed Prep Matters, written with perspectives from Dr. Tara Kaczorowski, Executive Director of Education Programs at Daemen University, and Dr. Andrew Hashey at SUNY Buffalo State. Both have navigated the practical realities of integrating AI-assisted video into their clinical models, and both arrived at the same conclusion:
The technology works best when it handles documentation, so faculty can go deeper on pedagogy.
What Changes When the Timing Changes
Dr. Kaczorowski described what she sees when candidates try to absorb feedback right after an observation. They are still running on adrenaline, nodding through a debrief without really hearing it. Asynchronous video changes the timing. Candidates can engage with their own teaching as evidence rather than memory, which changes the whole texture of the supervisory conversation.
The piece also traces how far the field has come since the 1960s, when Stanford researchers hauled 100-pound video equipment up school stairwells to give a single teacher candidate a chance to see herself teach. The concept was always sound. Technology is finally catching up.
If your EPP is navigating these questions, the full article is worth a read. Read it in Ed Prep Matters | AACTE. And if you want to see how Vosaic fits into your clinical model, our team is happy to talk through it. Start a free trial or reach out directly.
