AI Co-Creative Art Narrative and Emotional Mediation Research: A Computational Grounded Theory Analysis of “The Era of Prompts” Exhibition at Tainan Art Museum
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.70232/jcsml.v3i1.45Keywords:
Artificial Intelligence Art, Grounded Themes, Computational Writing, Emotional Mediation, Adaptive DevelopmentAbstract
Against the backdrop of rapid development in generative artificial intelligence technology, the definition, process, and evaluation standards of artistic creation are undergoing a profound transformation. This study takes “The Era of Prompts—A Challenge Letter from AI to Humanity” exhibition at Tainan Art Museum as the research field, employing mixed research methods to explore the multiple impacts and educational implications triggered by AI intervention in artistic creation. The research integrates exhibition ethnography, procedural scaffolding experimental design, and computational grounded theory analysis, conducting a three-stage learning journey experiment with 206 university students in southern Taiwan. The primary objective was to understand how university students perceive and engage with AI in the context of art creation, and to identify the core themes that emerge from their learning experiences. The main findings reveal five grounded themes of AI art learning: computational writing practice, emotional expression mediation, imperfection value reconstruction, collaborative relationship dynamics, and literacy requirement identification. These five themes interact spirally to form the theoretical model of “Adaptive Development of Art Learning in the AI Era.” The research concludes that art education in the AI era needs to construct new pedagogical paradigms that embrace technological innovation while maintaining human subjectivity, criticality, and emotional depth in creation. This study provides important references for theoretical construction and educational practice of AI art, offering a nuanced understanding of the human-AI creative partnership. The findings suggest that rather than viewing AI as a mere tool, it should be approached as a collaborator, a mediator of emotional expression, and a catalyst for re-evaluating the very nature of creativity. This research contributes to the fields of art education, human-computer interaction, and digital humanities by providing an empirically grounded framework for designing and evaluating AI-integrated learning environments.
References
Brennan, K., & Resnick, M. (2012). New frameworks for studying and assessing the development of computational thinking. Proceedings of the 2012 Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, 1-25. https://www.media.mit.edu/publications/new-frameworks-for-studying-and-assessing-the-development-of-computational-thinking/
Charmaz, K. (2024). Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis (3rd ed.). Sage Publications. https://collegepublishing.sagepub.com/products/constructing-grounded-theory-3-255601
Chen, S. J., Shan, X., Liu, Z. M., & Chen, C. Q. (2024). Employing large language models to enhance K-12 students’ programming debugging skills, computational thinking, and self-efficacy. Educational Technology & Society, 28(2), 259-278. https://www.jstor.org/stable/48827986
Cope, B., & Kalantzis, M. (2009). “Multiliteracies”: New literacies, new learning. Pedagogies: An International Journal, 4(3), 164-195. https://doi.org/10.1080/15544800903076044
García Peñalvo, F. J., & Vázquez Ingelmo, A. (2023). What do we mean by GenAI? A systematic mapping of the evolution, trends, and techniques involved in generative AI. International Journal of Interactive Multimedia and Artificial Intelligence, 8(4), 7–16. https://doi.org/10.9781/ijimai.2023.07.006
Jauhiainen, J. S., & Krohn, T. (2024). Generative artificial intelligence and dynamic personalized learning pathways in higher education. Frontiers in Education, 9, 1347193. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2024.1288723
Kress, G. (2010). Multimodality: A social semiotic approach to contemporary communication. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203970034
Lin, H. C. K., Tseng, C. H., & Chen, N. S. (2025). Enhancing programming education: The impact of AI-based pedagogical agents on student self-efficacy, engagement, and learning outcomes. Educational Technology & Society, 28(2), 279-294. https://doi.org/10.30191/ETS.202504_28(2).TP02
Luo, H. L. (2025). The era of prompts─A Challenge Letter from AI to Humanity. Tainan Art Museum. https://www.tnam.museum/exhibition/detail/605
Nelson, L. K. (2020). Computational grounded theory: A methodological framework. Sociological Methods & Research, 49(1), 3-42. https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124117729703
Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the Horizon, 9(5), 1-6. https://doi.org/10.1108/10748120110424816
Rudolph, J., Tan, S., & Tan, S. (2023). ChatGPT: Bullshit spewer or the end of traditional assessments in higher education? Journal of Applied Learning and Teaching, 6(1), 342-363. https://doi.org/10.37074/jalt.2023.6.1.9
Squire, K. (2011). Video games and learning: Teaching and participatory culture in the digital age. Teachers College Press. https://www.tcpress.com/video-games-and-learning-9780807751985
Sullivan, M., Kelly, A., & McLaughlan, P. (2023). ChatGPT in higher education: Considerations for academic integrity and student learning. Journal of Applied Learning and Teaching, 6(1), 31-40. https://doi.org/10.37074/jalt.2023.6.1.17
Tedre, M., & Vartiainen, H. (2023). Computational thinking and AI literacy: Emerging competencies for the digital age. British Journal of Educational Technology, 54(4), 1018-1036.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvjf9vz4
Wing, J. M. (2006). Computational thinking. Communications of the ACM, 49(3), 33-35. https://www.cs.cmu.edu/~15110-s13/Wing06-ct.pdf
Yin, S. X., Goh, D. H. L., Quek, C. L., & Liu, Z. (2025). Mapping the public understanding of computational thinking education: Insights from social Q&A platform discussions. Educational Technology & Society, 28(2), 15-34. https://doi.org/10.30191/ETS.202504_28(2).RP02
Zhang, K., & Aslan, A. B. (2023). AI technologies for education: Recent research & future directions. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 4, 100118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2021.100025
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Hao-Chiang Koong Lin, Tao-Hua Wang, Ruei-Shan Lu

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
