It is widely accepted that one of the most important details in education is a teacher-student connection; this is done largely by getting to know a student’s characteristics, drive and individual needs. It is done with one-on-one, constructive interaction between pupil and professor, something that, although difficult in today’s world, can completely change a child’s experience in the classroom and what they take away from a lesson. For the teacher, it can offer a unique opportunity to help shape someone’s future.
Having such an impact is only one of very few upsides. However, considering the tremendous stress and general dissatisfaction associated with a career in education, especially in the United States, it is easy to understand why so many teachers have turned to using artificial intelligence in the creation of everything from simple warm-up questions to entire assignments. By no means am I saying that teachers are not due their worth, because they absolutely are (when they do their own work).
Advocates acclaim its ability to create more impactful lessons, automate grading practices and personalize learning overall; however, returning to the importance of teacher-student connection, is it really distinct and unique to the student if the one doing the personalization is not a teacher, but a computer? It sends the message that the teacher is either too busy with life to focus on the classroom or downright uninterested in being involved, and as I’m sure we all know, one of the cornerstones to any relationship is involvement. How can students be expected to learn, or even care about learning, when all they are fed is AI-generated slop? How can teachers demand higher wages and respect when turning over jobs to free-use generative AI programs?
Another concern: personalized AI systems effectively function by collecting, analyzing, and applying student data. The Los Angeles Unified School District, the second-largest school district in the United States, was subject to a massive cyberattack as recent as 2022; stolen data, which included names, social security numbers, driver’s license numbers, addresses, contact information, medical information, educational records, conduct reports and other details was later released online. What happens to the data harvested by these AIs? How safe is it? What might an attack on a nationwide provider like Google Classroom look like? How much damage could the release of such sensitive information, belonging to students across the country do?
AI is not always right, either. For all its supposed advantages, it cannot apply common sense any more than it can reason ethically or understand cause and effect; nor can it comprehend state standards, understand AP style, follow traditional teaching parameters or rationalize a student’s explanation. Besides that, there is always the chance of bias; machines, like people, are entirely susceptible to inheriting preexisting beliefs.
And, as always, there is the creativity dilemma. Cheating has been a longstanding accusation in schools around the world; since the launch of ChatGPT teachers have been straining to prevent its use on assignments. Somewhat ironic, as a recent study by the website Quizlet found that teachers rely more on generative AI than students; the conversations of “the eroding of academic integrity” obviously mean little in the long run. Neither party learns anything from having English students analyze AI-written text for human qualities.
Teachers, real, human teachers can identify the needs of certain students. Effective education requires a firm understanding of the student’s thinking patterns and learning style, something that can only be obtained with time and patience. When leaving the classroom in such a way, teachers effectively reduce their role to that of a facilitator rather than an educator. As it is, the lack of transparency in the use of artificial intelligence in classrooms, if it were to continue, could cause irreparable damage to what trust is left in our country’s educational system. Teachers, like students, should do their own work; generative AI has plenty of benefits, none of which are located within our schools.