AI and the human work of teaching

In recent years, the world has experienced an acceleration of what we call “artificial intelligence (AI)”, a term of all-to-all referring to technologies which seem to be a pseudo-detector element. This new wave of innovations includes the generation of long essays with only a few invites to reterpolate portraits in works of art from familiar artists. Like a vocal ensemble of artists,, technologistsAnd intellectual These are that these technologies mean for the future of their work, the developers have sought to integrate AI into several facets of our online and offline lives. These tools offer a premise: why spend hours developing an artifact that AI can do in a few minutes? Great attention has been paid to economic, environmental and moral costs of such a proposal, but not enough to modify the consumption of the general population.

In Education spacesThe amplification of AI has terrified and enharge educators – and by the educator, I mean children of children, including paraprofessional, social workers, etc. – At all levels. On social networks, a plethora of educators express either their dissatisfaction or their support for the use of AI. On the one hand, educators have solid arguments against Students using AI to write trials And Solve mathematical problemsarguing that the use of these tools ultimately dulls the critical thinking of students and the ability to generate meaning from their assignments. On their credit, both the National Association of Education and the American teacher federation have sought to influence the way AI affects teaching and learning. Last year, the NEA summoned a national panel of educators to create a report on the current and future role of AI in classrooms, including opportunities and damage. More recently, AFT has developed a partnership with Microsoft, Openai, Anthropic and the united teachers' federation to create a “National Academy of IA instruction», An effort of several million dollars to provide training and a study program to kindergarten educators in the 12th year.

On the other hand, The districts have spent millionsif not billionson Tools supported by AI Who write course plans, note duties and generate reports on students, teachers and school performance. In other words, not only will IA tools have an effect on how we consider learning, but it necessarily reaches how we understand teaching. Recently, Microsoft announced a donation of $ 4 billion to schools, colleges and non -profit organizations from kindergarten to 12th year as part of its initiative “Microsoft Elevate”. This follows an effort on several levels of large companies to invest in AI in the class after the executive order of President Trump to promote more innovation in AI. The technology industry seems to go beyond school discussions on AI uses and abuses to large -scale investments, but if they implement contributions from practitioners at the community level.

Teaching and learning as a workforce has not been sufficiently examined from this objective. Teachers' work was examined by generative AI (GENAI) tools. A plethora of companies have done an excellent job of Exposing the advantages of the use of Genai to simplify the ardor of teaching. Some prediction that teachers would no longer be necessary in the near future. Given the already intimidating shortages of teachers across the country, negative attitudes with regard to work on the part of certain district and federal leaders and the acceleration of these tools, we could agree. (International Education, a World Teacher Syndicat, much more skeptical.) If, in the eyes of AI evangelists, we believe that teaching is only the performance of knowledge, what is the difference between an algorithm and a teacher? In the past, the decline has encouraged sellers to treat teachers as “facilitators on the side”. In this interpretation of teaching, the educators “depart” by students and their individual journey through the tool.

Holding for this framework, teaching as a profession has already been deprofessional. Ironically, teachers' professionalization efforts in terms of standards and assessments have levels of autonomy and agency inversely stripped necessary for this authentic work. Simple concepts of teaching as a delivery believe that man-centered teaching work, that is to say to what extent humans think of the way young humans learn through the meaning they do on the world. While researchers during the decades have studied the concepts of professionalism among several professions, few or no information positions themselves on their work and why this counts.

As such, it is up to us to rethink the question of AI and education. Instead of asking “How can we bring more teachers to use our tools?”, We can ask “What parts of a teacher's workload are simple using our tools?” While the first assumes that teachers are simple recipients of advanced technologies, the second affirms the responsibility of teachers towards the trajectory of learning students in their classrooms. After all, even with Increased use of AIteachers report that AI hurts more than good in education. When surveying the research, some things appear:

1. The teachers pushed the huge amounts of paperwork and documentation that seem to sit outside the outskirts of their main work.
2. Teachers in the United States have collectively have some of the highest rates from the teacher to the teacher with apparently few awards. In comparison, other “efficient” countries have much less time in front of students and more time to plan individually and collectively with colleagues.
3. Teachers are using Genai more and more to simplify the “boredom” of their work. It is much easier to plan lessons, create assessments and assign classes and duties thanks to an advanced mechanism which can also bring the standards of invites.
4. Teachers already used adaptive and informed technologies of data such as individualized evaluation generators, learning management systems and scripted lessons – voluntarily or otherwise – for at least the last 20 years.
5. Teachers ‘morale is in the context of this conversation given the problems of teachers' attrition.

Taken together, this may seem an ideal opportunity for education technologists to create more Genai tools if they have not already done so. However, not only does the majority of students still want humans when teachers teach them, but schools do not think that teachers should be replaced by the Genai. In future tests, it will be important to better understand the real work teaching and learning and where AI seems useful or not.