(download a pdf of all research here)
Our ask: AI is not inevitable. As Olivia Guest, computational cognitive scientist at Radboud University, writes: “‘Study after study shows that students want to develop these critical thinking skills, are not lazy, and large numbers of them would be in favor of banning ChatGPT and similar tools’, says Guest. By speaking up, the researchers aim to show that the ‘inevitability’ of AI is just a marketing frame perpetrated by the industry and that pushback is a lot more possible than we often see.”
To allow our students to develop these critical thinking skills and to resist AI, here are our asks:
There should be a moratorium on the integration of AI into classrooms and other educational spaces. During that time, school districts should come up with a meaningful way have a long, meaningful conversation about generative AI to ensure that parents and students:
- know where AI is being integrated into lesson planning and content that children are being taught.
- know when students are asked to use AI tools for class or homework.
- know when AI is used in grading or assessment of work.
- know when schools are getting money for AI, including when it’s integrated into other platforms such as HMH.
- know what training around AI is being offered to teachers and students.
- know how programs protect the privacy rights of students, including the rights over their own intellectual property.
Overall, the educational community as a whole should feel part of a conversation about how children should be educated. There should be a sense that this is not inevitable, but that we can critically evaluate AI like we would any other tool, and then choose whether this is how we want our children educated. We can choose how technology shows up in schools. New York State chose to adopt a bell-to-bell ban on cell phones, we can choose to keep classrooms AI free.
PACES 