As an educator, I disagrees on many levels. Firstly, schools babysit YOUR kids. Most people couldn't do their jobs, meaningful or otherwise, without them. Two, schools are about socialism and human connection, something AI can't provide. Whilst your experience might be different, a good school will educate beyond say science and maths, and teach values, ethics, drug and alcohol awareness, sex education etc etc. fourthly, big tech has entered schools before. Where it fails is it never can replace the passion of human teachers that drive and foster curiosity, which is the centre of learning. Whilst I concede not all educators can do this, perhaps money and time should be spent on excellent teacher training. Lastly, AI has yet to prove it's not wrong 100 percent of the time. It often tells us what we want to hear rather than engage with us honestly. Kids are already using AO to supplement their learning, but the trick is teaching them to use it wisely - students are still learning to be discerning, to understand where vested interest lies (are there safeguards to companies embedding AI with bias??), to know when AI is bending them in one direction, to understand legitimate sources, let alone navigate human relationships. I really protest against such a shallow and clearly bitter view of education as it stands ... Whilst the model doesn't serve every one, and has its failings, it's the best we have got and teachers work so hard to support and better students. To say AI can and should replace them is simplistic at best.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
Respect to you, there are many great educators that deserve their medals.
But the facts remain and I'll start by saying that there are many ways to build human connections besides schools.
You speak of AI's dishonesty as if human educators can't be dishonest.
The focus of this post was "personalized learning," where individuals can gain access to learning experiences that are tailored to their capacity, something that would prove very expensive with human educators.
I also think that the "human connection" is becoming a terrible argument that comes up when there's nothing else to argue against AI adoption, I've heard and read it so many times that it no longer feels like something to truly consider.
My reasons being that AI can be designed to mimic humans in whatever way needed and in any form, at some point there will be not much difference.
It will be able to lie to protect our feelings, cheat to please, to your "babysitter" comment: AI will have far more tolerance and everything else. There's not much anyone can do to stop it because the upsides are appealing, in many ways, and none of these things stops anyone who believes they shouldn't use AI.
From reading your comment, it sounds like you think I'm advocating for educators to be replaced, while the reality is that I'm simply pointing out what can be.
I look at the numbers and I present them, with what I think about them. That's it.
AI can be used for a lot of good and a lot of bad, as everything else under the sun.