K-12 educators are under pressure to use—and have students use—a wide range of AI tools. Even those who envision benefits to schools of this fast-evolving category of tech should approach the well-funded AI-in-education campaign with skepticism and caution. Some of the main arguments for teachers using AI tools and introducing students to AI as early as kindergarten are questionable or fallacious. 

​

Argument: “Schools need to prepare students for the jobs of the future.”

Counterargument:

• The skills employers seek haven’t changed much over decades and include a lot of “soft skills” such as initiative, problem-solving, communication, and critical thinking. 

• Growing research shows using generative AI can degrade these key skills and inhibit learning.

• We don’t know what the jobs of the future will be. Companies don’t know how AI might transform their businesses, and 95% of those that have invested in GenAI are so far “getting zero return.” 
   

Argument: “AI is a tool, just like a calculator.”

Counterargument:

• Calculators don’t provide factually wrong answers, but AI tools have.

• Calculators don’t provide dangerous, even deadly feedback.

• Calculators aren't potentially addictive and don't encourage repeated use by flattering, directing, or manipulating.

• A far better analogue: a smartphone. More states and schools are restricting or banning phones in classrooms—once touted as an encyclopedia in a kid’s pocket— because they can be addictive and impede attention, engagement, learning. It doesn’t seem adults should have to learn the lesson twice and so soon: let a technology proliferate in schools by ignoring its risks until well after harm is done. 
   

Argument: “Students are already using AI, so we have to teach them ethical use.”

Counterargument: Students can be educated on the ethics of AI without encouraging use of AI tools. They can be taught, as part of media literacy and social media safety programs, about AI’s potential as well as how it can enable predation, perpetuate bias, and spread disinformation. They should be taught the risks of AI and its social, economic, and environmental costs. Giving a nod to these issues while integrating AI throughout schools sends a strong message: the schools don’t really care and neither should students.

​

Tech firms have been selling schools untested products for years. Technophilia has led to students being on screens for hours in school even when phones are banned. Jess Grose explains, “Companies never had to prove that devices or software, broadly speaking, helped students learn before those devices had wormed their way into America’s…schools.”  AI appears to be no different.

​