New York City has also banned AI for younger students as concerns over classroom use grow

Another school district has banned AI from being used in the classroom by students across all grades. While this isn’t the first ban of its kind that we’ve seen, what’s interesting is that it was introduced just weeks after the district started piloting Google Gemini for older students. Frederick County became the latest school district to ban AI use in the classroom this week, voting 6-1 to restrict the technology from pre-K through 12th grade. Initially, the board considered only banning AI for younger students, but eventually extended the ban through high school.

  • Cherries@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    19 hours ago

    We don’t need AI to teach critical thinking. It doesn’t do anything better or in an innovative way, especially when accounting for the costs associated with AI. It is unnecessary to make a brand new round hole for this square peg.

    • partial_accumen@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      19 hours ago

      It doesn’t do anything better or in an innovative way,

      It does it in a very applicable way in the sense that these students will be encountering AI “in the wild” in the years to come. The ways and methods AI is wrong isn’t really identical to the way humans deceive. As an example, most humans won’t straight up manufacture a fake citation to prove a point where this is a commonplace action of factually wrong LLMs.

      In this way using AI to produce the content that students are assigned to criticise is much more useful and less costly than human generated content. I’m not saying that LLMs should be used exclusively to create the target content, but it would be equally wrong to use human generated target content exclusively because humans are wrong in different ways (and that content is much more costly to create).

      especially when accounting for the costs associated with AI.

      Are you talking about monetary costs or something more philosophical (ethical, environmental, sociological)? The monetary costs would be extremely cheap. Probably less than $10 in tokens for the entire curriculum for the AI generated content. The necessary human contributions would be significantly more expensive, likely tens of thousands of dollars. The human component is still absolutely necessary, but it would be the far more monetarily expensive part.

      It is unnecessary to make a brand new round hole for this square peg.

      AI content students (when graduated into adults) have the evaluate is a new peg with a new shape. We can pretend its the same shape as the previous one and attempt to use the prior solution, but it will fail the education system and the students going through it arriving unprepared in the adult world rife with AI content that they will need to evaluate in their daily lives.