<\/p>\n
Students use laptop computers and traditional textbooks at the Early College High School at Texas A&M International University in Laredo. The use of AI can erode our independence as individuals and as humans in a community.<\/p>\n
Robert Daemmrich Photography Inc\/Corbis via Getty Images<\/p>\n
College students attend a lecture in Los Angeles in 2025. Computers may not be as useful in the classroom, after all.<\/p>\n
Jay L Clendenin\/Getty Images<\/p>\n
People often tell us teachers that it\u2019s our responsibility, in this modern and rapidly changing time, to teach our students to incorporate generative artificial intelligence into their studies. These technologies are an inextricable part of our future, they argue. We must act now, choose quickly, try anything; we can\u2019t allow our students to fall behind.\u00a0<\/p>\n
Imposed urgency is one of the most compelling tools of the con artist.\u00a0<\/p>\n
I am not worried about whether our students will lag behind others in their use of generative AI technology. Maybe they will use it, or maybe most of the AI tech we\u2019re bombarded with today will fizzle out, a flash in the pan. It\u2019s not a teacher\u2019s job to see the future. It\u2019s our job to teach students that their own brains are beautiful, powerful and useful.\u00a0<\/p>\n
Article continues below this ad<\/p>\n
Generative AI erodes our independence as individuals and as humans in community. It is incompatible with the work of the classroom teacher.\u00a0<\/p>\n
This year is the first in my 19-year career teaching high-school English language arts that I have required students to\u00a0handwrite most of their major assignments in class, on paper, while I watch. This choice, born of desperation, has provided wonderful results. My students are writing better, and they know the content of their writing more; even students who would never use AI are finding value in the tangible, messy process of shaping their handwritten words into coherent arguments.\u00a0<\/p>\n
San Francisco Chronicle Logo<\/p>\n
Make us a Preferred Source to get more of our news when you search.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n Add Preferred Source<\/p>\n <\/a><\/p>\n Meanwhile, I\u2019m learning again, after years of incorporating computers into my teaching, that I don\u2019t need them as much as I thought.\u00a0<\/p>\n There are so many conversations we could have about generative AI. We could talk about the choices of AI companies to push their tools on all of us<\/a>, including young people<\/a>. We could talk about the heavily bankrolled<\/a> initiatives to introduce AI<\/a> into our schools<\/a> and the absolute lack of hard evidence that any AI use at all is good for young people\u2019s growing brains. AI use leaves many students uncertain about their own capacity to learn.<\/p>\n Article continues below this ad<\/p>\n We could talk about the unsustainability of this AI experiment on a host of fronts: the\u00a0cold depersonalization of acts of war<\/a>, the environmental depredations<\/a>, the exploitation<\/a> of human labor<\/a>, the vanishing jobs<\/a> and the phantom pressure AI exerts<\/a> on those\u00a0who remain<\/a>; AI companies\u2019 scrambling assertions<\/a> of market dominance even as the products implode under their own costs<\/a>; the people and cities like San Francisco swept up in the promise of this new technology, who will be financially devastated<\/a> if these promises turn out to have been false. We could talk about the billionaires<\/a> who are, ultimately, the ones who will profit from the wholesale devaluation of human knowledge, intelligence and skill.\u00a0<\/p>\n For all of us\u00a0\u2014 yes, even the billionaires\u00a0\u2014 the prospect of widespread desocialization and deskilling should be terrifying. We have all read or heard the horrific stories about chatbots that target vulnerable, lonely people<\/a> with narratives<\/a> that pull them away from community<\/a> and into a world of dangerous delusions<\/a>. It\u2019s easy for many of us to think that this is tragic, but that of course we, personally, would not succumb to the sweet nothings of a robot that promises that it knows what we need, and that it will make our lives easier, if only we give it a chance.\u00a0<\/p>\n Far too many of us are giving AI our trust, even as it keeps showing it will harm us.\u00a0<\/p>\n You\u2019ve probably seen it in your social circles, your workplace, maybe even your family. People aren\u2019t just asking AI the questions they used to ask computers; they\u2019re asking the app instead of talking to humans. They are increasingly unable to differentiate between real and generated content. They are unsure what to believe, or, in some cases, whether reality even exists.<\/p>\n We think we\u2019re too smart to be duped, but recent studies into user trust in AI search results<\/a> and writing tasks<\/a> suggest that once a person relinquishes any cognitive power at all to AI, they are unlikely to reclaim that power.\u00a0<\/p>\n Article continues below this ad<\/p>\n This is terrifying on many fronts, but for me, none is more terrifying than the potential of AI to interfere with the intellectual development of young people.\u00a0<\/p>\n Many proponents of AI in education tout its potential to help learners by taking away the busywork of brainstorming, of summarizing, of reading closely, of discerning quality evidence<\/a>. It\u2019s important to note that the individual people and groups<\/a> pushing generative AI<\/a> in education<\/a> have likely already learned these skills, but either do not know or do not care that these skills are essential. This hard mental work is the foundation of learning\u00a0\u2014 and children who are not required to engage with it may spend their lives dependent on a machine because they have never been taught to think for themselves.\u00a0<\/p>\n Guest opinions in Open Forum and Insight are produced by writers with expertise, personal experience or original insights on a subject of interest to our readers. Their views do not necessarily reflect the opinion of The Chronicle editorial board, which is committed to providing a diversity of ideas to our readership.<\/p>\n