Subscribe
Share
Share
Embed
The voice of the American Consortium for Equity in Education at ace-ed.org | Host Larry Jacobs facilitates rich discussions with innovative educators, thought leaders, authors and the leaders within the education industry to promote equity, access and opportunity for every student in every school.
I'm David Cicero, and this
is Education Talk Radio.
98 students representing all 50 states
came together as a part of America's
Youth AI Festival and were asked
to wrestle with some of the hardest
questions schools are facing about AI.
The students didn't just
offer their opinions.
They debated, negotiated, made
some surprisingly firm choices, and
ultimately produced the Students'
First Act, a student-written framework
for the use of AI in schools.
Today, we're gonna hear about how it all
happened and hear from the students who
actually had to make those decisions.
Joining me is Jeffrey Riley, the
executive director of Day of AI, along
with National AI Student Senators
Shamitha Dokki and Nandana Warrier.
Jeff, Shamitha, Nandana,
welcome to Education Talk Radio.
Thanks for coming on.
Thanks for having us.
So Jeff, take us back to the beginning.
What was the idea behind America's
Youth AI Festival, and what
were you hoping the National AI
Student Senate could accomplish?
So I had been in public education for
30-plus years, and I was getting ready to
retire when MIT called me, uh, and they
base-- they basically offered me this
position to run this nonprofit that was
being launched out of the university,
but I only had one question for them,
which was, "Could I say what I want?"
And I think they were a little struck
by that question, but the reason I asked
it was because we've kind of missed the
boat on social media and cell phones
15 years ago and regulating that, and
now it appears that we have rising
mental health challenges with kids.
I think AI, this new technology, is
going to actually kick off the next
revolution in education, but there's also
some bad things associated with AI too.
So what we wanted to do was make sure
that we created an organization that
worked to, uh, make sure kids can use
this technology safely and productively.
And one of the big ideas we had is,
you know, sometimes kids know more
about the technology than the adults,
so why don't we hear from them first?
You know, the-- there's been no consensus
at the federal level, so we thought we'd
ask the kids, and we brought two kids
in from every state to serve as, uh,
senators representing their state to
the Kennedy Institute, which is an exact
replica of the US Senate, and they served
as senators, and they passed a bill.
So how did they go from 98 individual
perspectives, that's a, that's a
lot of students coming together, to
something they could collectively
put their, put their names behind?
What did that really look like?
Well, there's a, there was a
process in place, and it started
when, uh, there was some outreach
to the students ahead of time.
They had some pre-work to do.
They had some readings to do.
And then they put down some of their
ideas and sent them back to the actual
Kennedy Institute, uh, uh, members, who
kind of created a rough draft policy that
they could work from once they got there.
And as you can imagine, people
had different ideas, so the policy
was filled with different ideas.
And what the kids did is spend a, I would
say, grueling 48 hours trying to hammer
something out that would, you know, that
everyone could agree on and compromise on.
For someone hearing about this for
the first time, what are the big ideas
in it, and what happens to it now?
Like, how will the
students remain involved?
Where does it live if I wanna go read it?
So, uh, certainly they could go
to our website, uh, dayofai.org,
to read the document.
But I guess the, um, the big idea that I
took away from it, and I don't wanna steal
too much thunder from the kids 'cause you
really should hear from them, is this idea
that as soon as devices are introduced
into the educational setting, s- uh,
kids need to learn about AI literacy,
and that's different than using AI tools.
AI literacy is learning about artificial
intelligence, both the good and the bad,
the pitfalls and the possibilities, right?
So they understand that this is not an
actual human at the under the, at the
other end of the line, that sometimes AI
makes mistakes, that sometimes there's
bias involved in what AI is producing,
uh, and that there's energy concerns.
And all the different issues that
come with AI, kids really need to
understand kind of underneath the
hood about what it is before they
should even touch any of the tools.
So that was their, in my opinion,
was their number one takeaway.
But they went deeper on everything
from due process if kids were
accused for cheating on AI to kind
of strict limits on, uh, you know,
creative work versus graded work.
Uh, and, you know, I really think they
were incredibly thoughtful in the process.
Yeah.
Well, let's, let's, let's get to it.
So, um, before you went through this
process, what did each of you think
schools were getting wrong about AI?
Shamitha, why don't you go first?
I knew many students, including myself,
that don't use AI to generate work
but use AI as a learning tool and to
help, like, guide our, uh, resources.
So when I have notes, I ask AI to generate
flashcards or ask it to create practice
quizzes based off the things that I have.
And I think teachers and
administration sometimes forget
that AI isn't just generative AI.
It can be used as a learning tool to
help increase your learning process.
So I think that, for me, is
the biggest thing that schools
were not really understanding.
Okay.
And so I'm just wanting to clarify
your point here that, um, there was,
maybe there was sort of a reaction
to it like, "Oh, this is bad," but
some students sort of saw it as, um,
something developmental that could
actually help in their learning.
Is that what you're saying?
Yeah, that's exactly what I'm saying.
Okay.
And then, Danna, what about you?
What, what do you think schools
were getting wrong about AI?
So along those same lines, I believe
that teachers and administrators only
saw the negative aspects of AI and
were putting in strict regulations
that would not allow students to
have any access to AI within schools.
At least in Arizona, in our district,
that is what me and Shamika saw.
But I do believe that having-- allowing
students to have some access to AI can
actually be more beneficial than harmful
so that they can use it for creative
thinking and to further enhance their
learning instead of actually harming it.
And going through this process, did
your mind change about anything?
It sounded like going into the process
we thought, "Wait a minute, this is
actually a useful tool, and all the
people around me are, are sort of
scared of it or, or thinking we're
gonna use it in the wrong way."
After going through this process and,
and being a part of the Students First
Act, did your mind change about anything?
What are, what, what maybe something,
something big that it changed?
So I, going through this
process, it really showed me how
complicated this topic is at hand.
Because hearing all the different
perspectives from each senator,
it showed me that each state has a
different viewpoint on AI, and it
shows that it's more complicated than
just having regulated usage of AI.
There's multiple concerns that
come with it, such as privacy,
ethical usage, lack of AI literacy.
So that is what we create, like,
what we hope to do by creating the
Students First Act so that we can
address these concerns while still
having regulated and ethical use of AI.
And now was that Nandana or Shamitha?
Nandana, yeah.
Nandana.
Okay.
Um, so it sounds like it broadened
your, your perspective of
what the problem actually was.
Would that be right?
Yes.
Okay.
And Shamitha, what about you?
Did your mind change about anything
actually going through the process?
Going through the process, and we saw
that parents can't exactly regulate
when their children use AI, but they do
have the right and the ability to make
sure that their children is aware of AI.
And like, like Mr.
Reilly talked about earlier, AI
literacy, I think one thing that
all of us senators could have agreed
is that AI literacy is the future.
AI is the future, and we have to move
with it instead of moving against it.
And by doing that, AI literacy is
probably one of the best ways to do that,
because by creating more awareness and
knowledge about this subject, people
will understand, like, all sides of it.
And I think by going to the Day of AI
conference in Boston, we were able to
really see that it's such a complex
topic, and it's not very clean cut.
So by raising awareness and knowledge for
AI through AI literacy classes, which can
start from any age really, could start
from elementary, middle school, high
school, depends on the district, depends
on what their resources are capable of.
I think AI literacy is probably
gonna be the best thing that we
can enforce in this day and age.
So you mentioned that you were a part
of, I forget what you called it, but
the, the, the Parent Council kind of
investigating the parent stakeholder
relationship with how AI is being used.
What is What are-- what did you see
was the primary concern of families?
Sometimes parents can be working against
the interests of children because there
are some instances where the child and
the parent don't really understand,
like, what the students are using AI for.
For example, I could use AI to
generate ideas, not create the
project, but generate ideas for me.
But if my parent sees it and thinks,
"Oh, well, they're using AI to complete
their work," there's that kind of gap.
So what we notice is that AI literacy
classes are not only important for
just students, but for parents as
well, because most of the time, most
of these parents went to school in
a day of age where the internet was
just becoming a big thing, and AI just
seems like this whole scary thing.
And I definitely understand that
concern on where people are coming
from, but AI is not just a bad thing.
It can be used for many
good things as well.
And I know even in work settings, like
AI is implemented into work systems.
I know Microsoft Copilot is used to
reword and rewrite emails, and a lot
of companies have started adapting
that into their company policies.
So I feel like the same thing could
happen to schools within time.
But I think it's very important
for parents to be able to gain
AI literacy and knowledge about
when their student is using AI.
So one thing that we came up with on the
parent subcommittee is that parents have
to sign an agreement that their student,
if the class requires AI usage throughout
the year or even at some instances, they
have to sign an agreement which says,
"Oh, I hereby agree to my child using
AI for the school year, and I understand
that if they are using generative AI
on assignments they aren't allowed to,
then there will be re-repercussions.
But if they're using AI to help generate
ideas or enhance creativity, then it's
okay and your child won't be punished."
So one of the hardest questions
here, um, as I was reading through
some of the act, seems to be the
line between AI helping you learn
and AI doing the learning for you.
And you've both spoken to that, uh,
maybe not directly, but I've heard it
in the explanations that you've given
How do you think about where that
line should be between helping you
learn and doing the learning for you?
Nandana, why don't you
take this one first?
So I believe that line is a matter
of fact of using AI to complete the
assignment for you and plagiarizing,
versus using it ethically and using it
to aid in your creative thinking and
boosting your knowledge while completing
the assignment at the same time.
So that's the line between
unethical use and ethical use,
and I believe that line is crossed
when the student hits copy/paste.
When they hit copy/paste, that's
when they're plagiarizing from AI
and not completing the work using
it as a tool, but using it as a tool
to complete it instead of aiding.
And so that line is the difference
between unethical and ethical use,
and that's what we wanted to fix
through the Students First Act.
We wanted to make sure that students and
teachers are using AI in ethical ways so
that we can enhance learning as a whole
instead of falling into the potential
harms of artificial intelligence.
So part of what you said
struck me as when it's used.
So you said when it's
used to complete work.
So it sounds like, okay, I've-- I, I'm
at this point where I'm about to turn
this in, um, let me use it to finish
this assignment and most of it's AI,
instead of using it earlier in the process
maybe to help me generate ideas, and
then I kinda take the baton from there.
So am I getting that, that right, Nandana?
That part of it is when it's used in the
learning, um, and assignment process.
Yes.
That definitely plays a part to it,
because if, as a student, let's say I
was using AI at the beginning of the
assignment to generate ideas and enhance
my thinking so that I complete the
assignment on my own, that is ethical use.
We have not crossed the line yet.
But let's say I'm a student and I--
midway through the assignment, I
realize I don't wanna do this anymore.
I use AI to finish the rest of it.
As a student, I have no retention
of what I just learned, and I
just used AI as a plagiaristic
tool instead of an aiding tool.
So yes, it, the matter of time and when
also plays a part in this question Mm-hmm.
Shamitha, what about you?
Where's that line for you between helping
you learn and doing the learning for you?
I think what Sh- what Nomna said,
I agree with a lot, but for me
personally, I think with each class
and each subject it's different.
For example, if we take art, if a
student is taking art and they use
generative AI to create art for them,
that's a line that they crossed.
Like when you're in art, maybe
your art teacher made you sign an
agreement, you and your parents
said you are not allowed to use AI.
I think the circumstances for each subject
in each department is very different.
So if I was in a writing class and my
teacher made me sign an agreement that
said, "You can use AI to help you come
up with ideas, but you cannot use AI
to generate your work for you," then
yes, for me, if you cross that line,
that's, oh, well, you used generative
AI to create an assignment where
you were specifically asked not to.
And then it's, it's really circumstantial
because I think with this day and age,
there's so many AI platforms getting
generated and becoming very popular.
Chatbots like ChatGPT, and LLMs, and
Claude, they're all super popular, and
they're gaining a lot of popularity
because they're known for its
generative AI and how quickly and
how efficiently it can generate work.
And I think the biggest part is if you are
asked to not use generative, generative AI
on your assignments, then you shouldn't be
using generative AI on your assignments.
If you're asked to use it, if you are
allowed to use it for creating ideas
and generating a guideline, that's okay.
I think depending on whatever your
teacher or your class is asked to do, if
you don't follow those regulations and
you go past that, I think that's when
the issue starts forming because, umâ¦
And earlier I talked about how the
parents of committee was focused on
creating agreements between the parents
and teachers, where the teacher gives
out a form that says you need to sign
and agree and consent that your child
is allowed to use AI for certain
things and isn't for certain things.
So I think that's where like the agreement
that I talked about earlier comes into
play, because there's different lines
for everything, and I think crossing
lines where you're using generative
AI to complete your work for you or
finish it for you is where the issue
starts, especially when you're asked
not to, because it's really hurting
your learning instead of improving it
Smita, when you first started answering
that question, you, you touched on
something, and I kind of wanna challenge
you to finish that thought a little bit.
So I, I, I took away two
things from your explanation.
The first, the first one was,
hey, this might vary by subject.
That's an actually-- That's
a, that's a very deep idea.
And then the second one was, hey,
if you've been instructed not to use
it, right, we're following policy.
I'm very interested in you extending your
thinking around, um, how AI might-- how
the use of AI might differ by subject.
You gave an example of art.
Can you share a little bit more just about
your thinking around how we might consider
the use of AI different by subject?
Yeah, of course I can go into that.
So kind of where that thought process
is coming from is, let's take math.
If I have a math test the next day
and I've already completed the study
guide, I've reached out to my teachers,
is there anything else I can do?
He says, "No.
Go ahead and do a study
guide one more time."
I've done the study guide.
I feel like I've memorized all the
answers, but I still want the practice.
There is nothing against putting the
study guide into AI and asking it
to create questions on the topics
it's already given you, but change
the numbers and make a key and give
it to me after I finish the problem.
I think that is a really good
example of using it to help you learn
and further your learning skills.
But then let's take the subject
of art or writing again.
Say that you're asked to create a
portrait that represents something that
you really like, and you create a list
of ideas, but then you put that into
like chatbots and you ask chatbots,
"Hey, which of the following ideas
that I created are the best ones?"
It lists out a couple of good
ones that you can expand on.
That's an example of using AI in art where
you're using it to help cre- um, further
expand your creative thinking skills.
But say I s- copy-paste the
assignment into ChatGPT or another
LLM, and I ask it, ask it, "Hey,
can you create the art for me?"
And then passing that off as your own,
as your own digital art that you made
on your computer, that's a really good
example for me on how you're not using it
to help you get better in your learning.
And for example, if you have your math
test and you're allowed to take it home,
some classes might let you take it home,
work on it, and then bring it back,
or you have test corrections, but you
come home and ask AI to do it for you.
That's also another example where in
different departments you can use it to
help better your learning skills, and you
can also use it to help hurt your learning
because you're asking it to do it for you.
And I know that many ChatG-
many like learning platforms,
they are able to detect AI, but
sometimes they're not able to.
For example, I'm writing a paper and
I authentically wrote it on my own.
I didn't use anything that was AI,
but it goes in through turnitin.com,
and it flags it for AI.
I think that's like the frustration
where students are coming from because
you write the work authentically,
but then it's flagged for AI.
So that just frustrates students, and
students are like, "Well, if it's,
if my own work is coming up as AI,
I might as well just use AI myself."
I think that's where the issue is because
if we're using AI to check whether it's
AI, that's where the problem is because
sometimes it c- recognizes students' own
writing as AI, and that's like an example
where I think that like- Teachers should
adapt with their methods of checking
whether something's AI or not, because
what might have worked a couple years ago
definitely won't work now because things
are growing and evolving as time goes on.
So when ChatGPT first came out
in 2022, it's definitely not the
same as what's out right now.
There's been four years for it to grow,
develop, and evolve, and in that time
period, AI has got more advanced, and the
tools that we used to look before whether
something was plagiarized or generated by
AI just aren't efficient enough anymore,
and I think that we need to grow overall.
And using AI literacy classes or
creating new platforms that don't just
use ChatGPT as a way to check whether
something's AI, I think that is what's
gonna help us move forward in this day
and age The framework actually draws a
really firm line around writing, right?
I found that particularly interesting.
Students shouldn't use AI
to do the writing itself.
Okay.
Um, and so what I'm wondering,
and this will go to Nandana, why
was writing the line, or what did
you believe a student would lose
by handing over that part to AI?
Yeah.
So there is this psychological
concept called critical periods,
and so the critical period for
preteens, that is 12 and below.
This is when preteens start to
develop abstract thinking skills,
and this is super important, and
it can be seen through writing.
Having students use AI to complete
their writing tasks or even aid in it
at these times can be detrimental to
developing these abstract thinking skills.
And so we stated in the provision
that prior to eighth grade, students
cannot use AI to aid in their writing.
However, after eighth grade, students
can use AI to boost their critical
thinking and creativity and expand
their knowledge to create a writing
assignment that is better than before.
And the reason we have this eighth-grade
cutoff goes back to that critical period,
because prior to age 12, if students do
not build these abstract thinking skills,
they could potentially be detrimental
in the future, and they could lead-- it
could lead to cognitive debt, because
one concern with AI is the outcome of
cognitive debt by-- because you could
have AI do the assignments for you.
That's the big thing of AI, the
unethical usage of it, and unethical
usage can lead to cognitive debt.
And we do not want that, especially
in writing, because writing has the
potential to build abstract thinking
skills, build critical thinking, and
all these skills are critical for the
future, and that is why we have that
eighth-grade cutoff, and it's due to
the psychological concepts of critical
period, at least in my eyes it is.
Yeah.
So it, it sounds like, hearing from
you two, it sounds like you both have
a very good hold of, um, understanding
when AI is helping you learn versus
when it's replacing some of the
learning that you are supposed to do.
It sounds like you both have
a really firm hold on that.
You can even speak to it
perhaps by subject, right?
You're very cognizant of, hey, at
this point, I've crossed a line.
I'm no longer doing the learning.
Do you think, um, your peers, the
average student, has an understanding
of when that line is crossed?
And do you think that that could
be, you know, something or that
should be something that maybe
could be a part of AI literacy?
Yeah.
So I do believe that students are able
to tell when this line has crossed,
because let's take the example of
the math homework Shamita mentioned.
Let's say that she brings back-- that
a student brings back home the test,
and they use AI to complete it for
them and review the work for them,
not doing anything on their own.
After you click submit or after
you complete the assignment, the
student could ask themselves,
"Did I learn anything from that?"
And they can't repeat a single fact
from the assignment, then that's--
they know the line that they've
crossed because-- And on average, a
student can tell when this happens.
But the real thing is, is
that how we can prevent this.
So as you said, AI literacy.
AI literacy is going to be the
future, and it'll be how we
can promote ethical AI usage.
So adding this fact and knowing when
not to cross the line, when you cross
the line, and how not to, adding
those facts into AI literacy programs
can be super helpful to the future.
And I represented the teacher
subcommittee, and we had AI
literacy in that as well.
We wanted teachers to also be educated
on AI literacy so that they can
teach their students through that.
And if teachers are experienced on
this ever-growing technology, then
students will be more prepared and
enhanced for the future with them.
So, so Shamita What is something
that we're not worried about enough?
Personally speaking from my district,
we already have AI regulation policies,
and we use a system called red
light, yellow light, and green light.
So if teachers say red light, that's you
cannot even use AI to help create ideas.
Yellow light is you can
use it to create ideas.
You can't use it to generate work.
Green light is there's
no parameters around AI.
You can use it however you
think it'll best benefit you.
And I think something that we're not
noticing is that the impact of not having
AI literacy classes and not starting
them, like now, is hurting people.
Because with the writing example that
you asked about earlier and why we were
so focused on writing, I'm gonna speak
personally 'cause we're seniors now, we
can kind of see the impact that AI has
had throughout our high school experience.
It first got introduced before, right
before we got into high school, and now
we're graduating, and AI is a big topic.
And what I've noticed is that because
our district has had regulations and
policies, me and Aman are able to
grasp when and when it's okay to not
use AI or when it's okay to use AI.
And that's why a lot of students
in the district can also agree
with, "Oh, I know when to use AI.
I know when not to use AI."
But that's because we've had
some sort of AI literacy.
Like we, we have been told what's okay
and what's not okay, and the effects
of AI and the positive effects of AI.
So I feel like because we had
this, we're able to see all sides.
And the thing is, a neighboring school
district of ours, they don't have any
AI regulations or there's no enforcement
on when or when not it can't be used.
So if a student is accused of generating
AI, there's no way for the teacher to
really confirm that because they're
just really using AI to check again.
And so there's no way to efficiently
ensure who's correct and who's wrong.
And I think because there's no AI literacy
classes, it's hurting learning because
I know students in districts that don't
have any AI regulation, and they've
used almost AI to write every single
essay they've ever had in high school.
And now it's time to write
your personal statements.
You're trying to apply to colleges
and stuff, and they're struggling on
how to write them because they just
used AI to do the work for them.
And it's really hurt them in
the long run because everything
involves writing these days.
When you get into college,
you need to write.
When you're applying to get into
college, you gotta write essays.
You have to write essays when
you're in college itself, no
matter what subject you're taking.
So I think it's really important that
you can see the negative effects of not
already having AI regulations nationally
or AI literacy classes implemented
because it's really hurting students, and
the damage it's having is very visible
And Jeff mentioned something at the,
at, at the top of the show around when
I think it was, uh, AI literacy should
begin, Shamitha, was that as soon as
devices are, are introduced to students?
What, what, what was
that part of the policy?
So I think what we agreed on in the
first act is that when you're in
elementary school, it's not really
necessary to introduce AI literacy
because most of the times devices
are not needed for that age period.
But when you transition into middle
school, I think I believe that that's
when AI literacy should start because
kids are getting old enough to think
for themselves now, and they're
no longer in elementary school, so
their mind shift also changes too.
So I think by having it in middle school,
even though devices may not be such
a huge part in middle school yet, it
prepares them for high school, so when
students get to high school, they know
not to mess around with AI, not to use
it to generate your work because there
will be consequences and repercussions.
'Cause what we're in right now is
if someone uses AI and there's no
set in stone rules or guidelines or
repercussions, students have the right
to challenge it and pr- and kind of
have the right to prove themselves
that it isn't AI, and most of the
times teachers are struggling to
see where that line can be drawn.
When can I assert and say, "This is a
zero," or when can I assert and say,
"You have to redo the assignment"?
And it's sh- very difficult for
teachers to be able to navigate and
learn throughout this whole process.
And I know that the teacher subcommittee,
they talked about, like, if you
can implement AI platforms into
your learning devices, so, like,
you can implement it into havingâ¦
When you're doing a slide deck,
students can ask questions and the
AI chatbot on the side can answer
them if the teacher's not available.
And I think there's so many things
that are introduced with AI, but
there's also so many negative
effects, so by s- tapping that with
AI literacy, starting from the
developmental stage at middle school,
that's when you're able to fully a-alter
their mindset and their thinking so we
can help students instead of hurt students
Got one final question for you two,
and it's a really important one.
You know, as I have, um, hosted this,
this podcast and talked with ed-
education leaders, um, around the
country, one thing becomes increasingly
clear, and it's not even particularly
related to AI necessarily, it's
just education in general, that the
human connection is irreplaceable,
and your framework says just that.
My question is this: as students growing
up with this technology, what parts of
education do you not want AI taking over?
Shamitha, why don't you go first?
For me, it's lecturing.
When I'm having a one-on-one
conversation with a teacher, "Wait,
I don't understand X, Y, and Z.
Why is it that I don't understand it?"
Or, "What can I do to help
myself understand it?"
By having them really explain it to
me, first of all, there's no bias.
Whatever I'm asking them in, they're
a professional in it, so nine out of
10 times they know the answer to it.
Also, they have been in the field
of teaching for so long, and they
also understand the fact that
every student learns different.
I'm a visual learner.
I learn better from pictures, and
I also learn better when someone
is explaining it to me and talking
to me instead of talking at me.
So when you have s- students with
varying abilities on how they
learn and what's easier for them
to learn, it's easier because a
teacher can meet all those needs.
For example, AI can't meet those needs.
They can't lecture to you.
I mean, they might have a voice tool
or a voice platform, but they can't
exactly talk about the subject without
being-- without you yourself being
100% sure that it's all 100% accurate.
And also, AI might be talking about
things-- If I'm in chemistry honors
and I'm learning about the general
basics of chemistry, I ask AI, "I don't
understand how to do this concept,"
and it gives me a bunch of topics and
a bunch of bullet points for each one.
I don't know what I'm supposed to
learn and what I'm not supposed to
learn because it might just be very
well pulling from organic chemistry,
which is a college-level class.
So I think teachers are the ones that
can give you the guidelines on what you
can learn and what's easiest to learn.
And so that's why everyone at the Day of
AI conference agreed that human connection
is absolutely irreplaceable because who
best to understand each other than humans,
rather than an AI technology platform
tool that was designed by humans, but it,
it really does have a mind of its own.
So I think that's where I think
human connection is really important.
It, it sounds like you're saying
that a, a human instructor is better
equipped to direct your learning.
Would that be a good
summary of what you've said?
Yes, I think that's a great way to put it.
Okay.
And then, Dana, what about you?
What, what parts of education
do you not want AI taking over?
Yeah.
So I do not want AI to take
over group interactions.
Shamitha mentioned the
teacher-student interactions,
and that is critical to learning.
But also the student-student
interactions and the group of
students with their teacher.
For example, let's take English classes.
Here at Mountain Ridge High School,
we have language composition and
literature, and in these classes we do,
for example, class debates where each
student gets a chance to voice their
opinion, provide their perspective, and
we all work together as a collection
to debate these topics, come to
agreements, come to disagreements.
And AI can't do this because if
I use AI and I ask it, "What's
a differing viewpoint from me?"
It'll provide a few other viewpoints, but
it won't be like I'm talking to a group of
my peers and with my teacher directing us.
And so these interactions are critical
to success and retention because without
these interactions, you are lacking
emotional support because it's a fact.
Emotional support improves your
knowledge, improves your retention,
and without these interactions,
student to student, student to teacher,
emotional support will not be there.
And considering aside from
retention and knowledge, mental
health will also decrease.
This mental health of these students
will likely plummet because they
lack this emotional support that
human interaction gives them.
And so having these social settings and
experiences really drive knowledge and
learning, and AI simply cannot replace
that because if I'm just talking to
an AI chat, I don't get the experience
that I would get in my English language
composition or literature class.
So overall, interactions, both student
and teacher and student-student,
are critical to learning and
should not be replaced by AI.
Great, great, great insights.
You know, Jeff, you said, um, before
this event that adults hadn't been
able to reach consensus and it was
time to let students lead the way,
and I, and I can, and I can see why.
But what do you think this
experience tells us about the
role students should have in
decisions about their own education?
Not just AI, but more broadly.
Well, I'm a firm believer that
we're entering into a new age in
education where we're going to be
able to differench- differentiate
instruction in a way we never could
before and personalize learning.
So if that's the case, we need
to hear from our kids about
what they're interested in and
what they wanna learn about.
Um, that doesn't mean we can't set
up a structure where all kids have,
you know, the basic understanding
of reading, writing, and 'rithmetic.
Uh, but I would just add to that now they
need reading, writing, 'rithmetic, and
artificial intelligence skills, right?
I just think we have to acknowledge
that what we've done in the past
has been good, but maybe we can
do things better in the future.
Thanks for joining us on Education Talk
Radio, a part of the B Podcast Network.
If there's a topic you'd like us to
tackle or have a guest idea, send me
a message at dciceroedutalk@gmail.com.
Thanks for listening, and
we'll see you next time.