AI Supported Education Promises More Than it Delivers

“Nobody was smarter than anybody else.”

In the short story Harrison Bergeron, Kurt Vonnegut envisions a future where everyone is equal, not by choice but by fiat. People who think too deeply or are too talented or strong are punished by an authoritarian government. Social homogeneity is programmed in and the special qualities that make humans human are weeded out. The nominal goal of this dystopia may be fairness––but the result is a world where no one can truly grow or think for themselves.

Unlikely, or uncanny? Given the rapid rise of artificial intelligence, it seems more and more likely that life will imitate art. 

The issues associated with excessive AI use are particularly pronounced in schools; students have started to increasingly rely on it to support their learning. However, what starts as “help” can quickly turn into inescapable dependence, which begs the question whether students may stop developing the ability to think for themselves altogether.

One of the reasons for the current trend is the lingering impact of COVID-19. During that time, many students fell behind. Learning online made it harder for students to stay focused and understand material in-depth. In November of 2022, OpenAI debuted ChatGPT, and millions of people began using the software. For students, it felt like the perfect solution to make up for the education they lost during the world’s most recent global pandemic. They could catch up quickly, get answers in an instant, and complete assignments with the wisdom of 175 billion parameters at their disposal.

Now AI use is creating more problems than it solves in the classroom.

Instead of using AI to support learning, many students now use it to replace their learning, offloading “cognitive effort” to the algorithm. Rather than working through a problem or sitting with a difficult question, students would rather save time by deferring to AI. Logging “correct” answers and meeting deadlines might “help” students in the short-term, but it negates higher order educational goals, such as building intuition, patience, and insight.

I have seen cognitive offloading in real-time in some of my own classrooms. Schools and teachers have tried to solve the issue by banning AI completely, but that approach has pitfalls, too. Savvy students still use it, just in secret. 

At the same time, assignments have been adapted because of AI. There is a much stronger focus on immediate results and on-demand writing due to a lack of trust between teachers and their students. In English class, for example, written assignments are often done quickly within a class period. Under these conditions, students’ ideas may be authentic, but they are underdeveloped. In the past, writing was a process. Students would write a draft, receive feedback from their teacher, and have the chance to improve their writing. Now, students are essentially being conditioned to think less deeply and value efficiency over depth.

However, the real issue is not the algorithm and the AI itself; it is how people are using it.

Research indicates that AI can enhance creativity by providing “original” and “useful” ideas; however, relying on the same algorithm decreases “idea diversity.” Algorithms tend to have the same formal and structured responses, with a human-like yet uncanny voice. If students depend on AI too much, they too will experience the “flattening” effect described by Vonnegut, losing uniqueness and individuality. Worse yet, students might stop using their critical thinking skills altogether, and essential faculties, such as problem solving, decision-making, and communication, will be a vestige of the past. 

These are skills that matter more than turning in your homework on time. These skills are necessary to become a successful adult. Being able to think independently and form your own ideas and opinions is essentially human. 

That’s precisely why the notion that uniqueness is a punishable concept in Harrison Bergeron is so off-putting, but its warning is so prescient. Today, the loss of uniqueness is not created by force, but by convenience. When it is easier to let something do the work for you, people slowly stop pushing themselves. 

So, what can schools do to remedy this?

It is too late to ban AI; instead, schools should teach students how to use it correctly. AI must be framed as an assistive tool meant to help students understand concepts––not replace their engagement with them. For example, permissible use might encompass feedback on essay drafts or synthesizing ideas in a chapter of a textbook, but it should never include writing essays or taking tests. 

The truth is, AI is not going to go away. It is already a significant part of how students learn, write, and complete their assignments. Therefore, the current moment is an inflection point; students, teachers, and the society we occupy have the chance to decide whether to grow alongside AI or surrender to it.

In the future, I believe that students and AI can coexist, but our success depends on the guardrails we put in place. AI can be a helpful tool that makes learning more accessible, but teachers and schools must consistently encourage students to think critically and, most importantly, think for themselves.

Otherwise, if we are not careful, we could end up in a world where, as Vonnegut wrote, everybody was “equal in every way.”

Leila Mudd is a sophomore at Burlingame High School.