Ban AI in NYC and LA Schools
Some big school districts are banning AI. NYC for K-8 and LA for K-12 bans vary in severity and what they actually limit, but the spirit is the same. Some of the rationale is reasonable. I am the father of an 11 year old and am not eager to see her using LLMs for research, writing, or companionship. The thing I find alarming is the idea that a ban is a comprehensive policy. Celebrations were widespread among groups skeptical of technology and of AI in particular.
Common Sense Media: "We're glad to see New York City Public Schools articulating an approach to AI that is aligned with our age and stage guidance for AI learning and development.”
LA Parent as quoted in EdWeek: “Thank you to the team for listening to the evidence, the facts, and perhaps our work here is done.”
Public campaign from Schools Beyond Screens: “There is a growing scientific consensus that AI use undermines the learning process, as well as the human relationship between teachers and students.”
And so it goes, on and on with celebrations on social and traditional media.
This hits home for us in higher education as well. For years Nik and I have pushed back on what we called “abstinence only” education about AI. The problem is kids are in school for 6-8 hours a day. Limiting access to LLMs on school devices during school hours does not eliminate AI from schoolwork, teaching/learning, or from social lives. If you do want to separate AI from learning at any level there are a couple options, none of them are great.
Complete surveillance monitoring. You only let students do work on district issued platforms that are equipped with comprehensive monitoring software that monitors other apps, eye movement, and ambient noise. Somewhat ironically, this is really only possible at scale with AI.
Comprehensive education of parents and students. You can ban AI if you fully engage with students, parents, and guardians about AI. If they become convinced AI is bad for learning, bad for retention, and bad for student development they are less likely to use it. But you have to get everyone onside. If a child goes to a ban-AI school but comes home to an AI friendly house you can bet they are going to use AI.
Neither approach is attractive or guaranteed to be effective. I don’t pretend this is easy or that solutions are straightforward, in fact my issue with this has less to do with the ban itself than the willful ignorance of commentators and perhaps policy makers that the solution to AI is as simple as banning it.
There are downstream implications of poorly implemented policies like getting LLMs off district devices and telling students not to use them.
We don’t know if this is the best thing for teaching/learning. Some of the rhetoric around the ban focuses on the unknowns of the technology on development, but that is also an issue. If we don’t know, should we be assuming this is bad? What if it is actually good when it is deployed well then have we stunted a generation? There is risk either way, but the risk of the status quo is often invisible.
Students who circumvent the ban will either be disadvantaged or advantaged–or both! Banning something without an enforcement mechanism does very little to deter many people. I don’t know if you have ever met a teenager, but following directions when you are not around is not always a strength.
For those of us on the ground as parents, teachers, and organizers, AI is difficult work and straightforward solutions aren’t exactly abundant. I don’t have a problem with people who want to keep AI out of learning nor with people who are ready to integrate it. But please quit pretending this is as simple as putting “No AI” on a syllabus or a school sign.