The actual problems with using AI as a teacher

I am writing here about using AI to generate content in ways that could reasonably be detected by others, such as assignment creation, emails, and written comments (I originally used a compound word that started with an "f" and ended with "back," but it flagged my post as spam, so I changed it to "teacher comments" throughout even though I strongly prefer my original word choice). Every time this issue comes up people point out that teachers and students have different roles, and that it’s not hypocritical for teachers to use a tool that students can’t. Which, yes, our roles are different. I can do lots of things my students can’t, some of it on the job. Point taken. But that’s not the real issue with using AI to generate content in the class. Education, especially in K-12, is a two-way relationship. We create the learning environment, and students literally and metaphorically show up for it each day (in theory, at least). As part of that, students expect that we will come up with assignments that are appropriate for their class and provide authentic comments and grades on their work. Why on earth would a student bother writing an essay they know full well AI is going to grade? Yeah, you can explain that “I still read the essay and check the score/comments” (more on that below), but to kids it still feels like less of a teacher-student interaction, more of a robot-student interaction with a teacher hovering in the periphery. There is understandably going to be less engagement and motivation on the student’s part. (And personally, this is where I get some of my best engagement. Even my slackers appreciate getting comments on the rare assignment they turn in, and it often motivates them to submit more. And the nerdy ones always crave teacher comments.) Are some students feigning outrage over teacher use of AI to justify outsourcing their own work? Of course. But a lot of the frustration is real, and I understand it. I’m churning out some NEA microcredentials for salary advancement right now, and it’s hard to care about the quality much when I know full well that 1) other teachers are totally using AI to do this, 2) a lot of the assignments themselves are probably AI-generated or -enhanced, and 3) I don’t actually know who’s scoring my work. It’s probably AI with an overtaxed human who looks over submissions the AI grader has flagged. I’m not using AI to do the tasks because that goes against my personal ethics, but I understand the temptation. Granted, there are aspects of teaching that students don’t understand or haven’t experienced yet. Most of us have probably had an essay graded by a TA rather than the professor, and of course not every teacher is producing artisanal handcrafted curriculum. But at least the TA is a person, making the teacher and TA a kind of team (plus that relationship is less important in college, where students are expected to take on more responsibility for their own learning). At least curriculum has traditionally been crafted by people. Because as I walk through the uncanny valley of AI-generated content, I am constantly searching for human voices, and I get why students prefer the same even if they can’t fully articulate the reasons. The other issue, which I rarely see discussed here, is that we are susceptible to automation blindness, which Cory Doctorow writes about in the context of AI here. Even though AI doesn’t work perfectly most of the time, many people assume it does, and those who don’t are still so inundated with so much AI-generated content that it becomes easy to assume it’s accurate. This is why I rarely believe teachers who claim to “always doublecheck AI.” I’m sorry, but the more you use it, the less I believe you’re checking it. I believe you think you are, but it’s human nature to become less vigilant with increased time and exposure. If you are that unicorn who’s painstakingly combing through every line of text you’ve ever generated by AI, confirming every fact, mulling over every bit of analysis, and thoughtfully considering every word choice, cool, but I don’t believe you’re in the majority. I find myself doing this with the google AI overview. When I forget to put -AI at the end of the google search, which happens annoyingly often given how long I’ve known about that trick, I find myself reading the overview first and only bothering to confirm the information if I consider it important. The less I care, the less likely I am to click one of the links and confirm AI’s representation of the content. I’ve been forcing myself to check the source any time I find myself doing this, but my point is that it’s easy to just shrug your shoulders and assume it’s fine because, hey, it was fine the last nineteen times. So no, the problem with teachers using AI to generate content is not that we should be held to the same standards as students. That would be silly. The problems are that regular use fractures the student-teacher relationship, which decreases student engagement and motivation, and that it encourages automation blindness. And yes, I understand that teachers are overburdened. I have over 180 English students each year, and they have annoyingly high turn-in rates. Personally, I deal with that by changing how I approach assignment comments (mostly by incorporating regular in-person conferences throughout the writing process so I can just give the rubric on final drafts) and incorporating more quiet/independent work time into my lessons so I can get some work done during class, but it’s not a perfect solution. So I get the reality of the job, and at the end of the day I can’t launch myself in front of anyone’s computer screen the second they open up their AI grading tool of choice, nor would I want to. But it’d be nice if we could address the real issues with using AI to generate content without resorting to cliches like “I already know the content so I don’t need the practice” (a statement which I suspect is routinely uttered by the same people who extoll the benefits of life-long learning, but whatever). That’s not the issue. No one is saying that you, too, need practice explaining symbolism in Fahrenheit 451. But you can’t really blame students if they respond to your decision to outsource your lessons and grading throughout your Fahrenheit unit by copying down the AI overview and resuming their nightly doomscrolling extravaganza. submitted by /u/ADHTeacher [link] [comments]