Earlier this month, New York City Public Schools pulled the plug on generative artificial intelligence for students in 2-K through eighth grade. The move, enacted for the current school year, came on the heels of last year\u2019s statewide cellphone ban, which prohibits the use of personal internet-enabled devices such as cellphones, laptops, tablets and portable music devices throughout the school day.\u00a0<\/p>\n
Despite the tumult in recent weeks<\/a> for the AI industry, prompting debates over the technology\u2019s risk of existential threats and critical safety failures, some New York nonprofit leaders are expressing concern over outright banning AI in schools.\u00a0<\/p>\n For students to be comfortable with AI, one leader argued, they need to use it. \u201cThe idea that you can learn AI fluency without using AI, I analogize this to trying to learn the piano by reading music,\u201d said David Adams, CEO of the Urban Assembly, a nonprofit that promotes economic and social mobility and supports more than 20 public schools in New York City. \u201cThis kind of abstract reasoning, knowledge-based understanding of AI will never be as good as playing F\u00fcr Elise and having to practice that and get that under your fingers.\u201d<\/p>\n Under the current moratorium<\/a>, all generative AI models and companion chatbots are banned from classrooms throughout the year. Educators can use AI for tasks like planning lessons but are not allowed to use it for grading, placement or other decisions about students.<\/p>\n Asked about concerns about limited AI exposure, a spokesperson for the city Department of Education referred City & State to a press release about the policy.<\/p>\n The ban does not apply to high school students. A maximum of 50,000 high school students (just 5% of the city\u2019s public school student body) will participate in five limited AI pilot classes throughout the year. While all high school students will be able to attend two 45-minute AI literacy classes per year, aimed at briefly familiarizing students in AI literacy, bias, risks and ethical considerations.<\/p>\n Some think limited exposure could have an adverse effect on the digital divide, namely in digital fluency levels and access to technological resources.\u00a0<\/p>\n \u201cThe real concern is that they aren\u2019t learning, in school, skills and tools and a level of skepticism about how AI works to be able to take that into their future,\u201d said Archana Jayaram, CEO of Brooklyn Community Services. \u201cKids who have resources at home, who maybe are participating in coding classes or summer camps or other places where they\u2019re getting exposure to AI, will gain an advantage in their later educational experience and career.\u201d<\/p>\n Major disparities in technological access, or the \u201cdigital divide,\u201d became key concerns during the COVID-19 pandemic, which exposed gaps in internet connectivity and technological access that can lead to worse outcomes for underserved students. The pandemic also ushered major investments in student technology like laptops, and last year, the city furthered that investment with a $330 million initiative to provide 350,000 new Chromebook laptops with free T-Mobile internet service to students. Mayor Zohran Mamdani scrapped the internet service portion<\/a> of that contract in a bid to cut costs, with the city saying it was paying for more service than necessary and could fill the need for a lower price.<\/p>\n Proponents of the AI moratorium stress that exposing students to AI before grasping the fundamentals of reading, writing and math can be detrimental to their progress.<\/p>\n \u201cI think we\u2019ve made this assumption that more equals better and earlier equals better, and it\u2019s all through the lens of future job skills training,\u201d said Jodi Carreon, national director of Schools Beyond Screens, a nationwide coalition of advocates against corporate-sponsored technology in classrooms.<\/p>\n \u201cWe\u2019re really kind of pushing back on that idea and questioning the developmental appropriateness of giving some of these tools much too early,\u201d she added. \u201cDoes it make sense to have a first grader have access to a spell-checker when they haven\u2019t learned the skill of spelling yet?\u201d<\/p>\n