AI and the impact on our local schools

The first in a three-part series on artificial intelligence (AI) and local school systems.

In March 2024, the Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) was held up as a trailblazer for its embrace of artificial intelligence (AI) when it unveiled a custom-designed chatbot called Ed for the students. The intent was for Ed to be a personalized assistant who would personalize academic plans. LAUSD Superintendent Alberto Carvalho called the tool a “game changer” that would “accelerate learning at a level never seen before.” However, LAUSD's AI approach transitioned from a trailblazing innovation to a problematic issue in just five months.

Within months, LAUSD’s startup vendor, AllHere, had financial problems, and the program was put on hold with the district investigating how the students' data was misused. According to Warren & Migliaccio, Attorneys website, AllHere Education Inc., a Boston-based Harvard Innovation Labs venture, filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy liquidation in Delaware. This was amid an investigation into allegations that AllHere’s “Ed” project, a $6 million AI initiative with the LAUSD, may have misused and failed to protect students’ information.

Alex Molnar, Director of the National Education Policy Center (NEPC) at the University of Colorado, referenced a March 5, 2024 policy brief written by Ben Williamson from the University of Edinburgh, Alex Molnar, and Faith Boninger from the University of Colorado titled, “Time for a Pause: Without Effective Public Oversight AI in Schools will do more Harm than Good.”

The policy brief states that as existing school-focused platforms and applications are updated to include AI, the immediate danger facing educators is not a future apocalypse. Instead, the danger is that AI models and applications will become enmeshed in school processes and procedures, which could allow private entities to increasingly control the structure and content of public education, reinforce surveillance practices, and amplify existing biases and inequalities. For decades, academic researchers have worked on AI models for use in schools. However, commercial enterprises are aggressively pushing AI (and its attendant risks) into classrooms today.

The Left Hand Valley Courier interviewed Ivan Portilla and Jeremiah Contreras to explore differing perspectives on the AI debate.

Portilla, a member of the IBM Academy of Technology, is an author and keynote speaker recognized for his innovative contributions to data science, robotics, and artificial intelligence.

Contreras, a Certified Public Accountant (CPA), holds a master’s degree in business and a Bachelor of Science in Accounting. He has played a leading role in integrating AI technologies into education across various disciplines, developing forward-thinking curricula designed to equip students for the shifting landscape of AI in business.

When questioned about the risks associated with the rapid advancement of AI, as highlighted in the NEPC policy brief, Portilla referred to the "singularity curve," which represents the point on a graph where machine intelligence surpasses human intelligence.

Portilla explained, "When that occurs, machines can begin to train themselves, and what happens when one species becomes more intelligent than another? They could take control if we don't properly train these machines." He added, "I am an optimist and believe machines have the potential to address inequity, solve medical challenges, and combat climate change."

Contreras said, "I don’t think it would be practical for all parties to pause their progress because some may choose not to adhere to the rules. This could allow others to pursue different paths, making it too late to intervene."

When asked whether the situation with LAUSD stemmed from inadequate vetting by individuals with limited technical knowledge of AI, Portilla responded, “What I have observed in school districts is that we are expecting educators, who often lack the experience, time, and resources, to make well-informed decisions about AI and the companies involved.” He commended the St. Vrain Valley School District (SVVSD), stating, “My solution is to integrate industry expertise and experience into educational settings, similar to what SVVSD’s Innovation Center has done.”

When asked the same question, Contreras responded, “Part of the hype lies in the rush to adopt new technology. Companies like AllHere were likely newly established, making it challenging to vet organizations in a rapidly emerging industry thoroughly.” He believes inaction is worse, as one may miss out on AI's potential educational benefits. However, even without direct benefits, the risks remain, as students will still engage with the technology.

He added, “Consider our experience with social media. We allowed kids to use platforms like Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, and gaming without fully understanding their long-term impact on our children. This time, with AI, we need to ensure its use is guided from the start, unlike what happened with social media.”

The Australian government announced in November what it described as world-leading legislation that would institute an age limit of 16 for children to start using social media and hold platforms responsible for ensuring compliance. “Social media is harming our kids, and I’m calling time on it,” Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said.

Organizations like the NEPC believe many questions need to be addressed when considering the integration of AI into public school systems. The issues include protecting student data privacy, insufficient teacher training, the alignment of AI tools with district curriculum standards, costs and the need for continued software updates, and potential biases in AI algorithms that could perpetuate or even amplify existing prejudices to name a few.

The next edition in this Left Hand Valley Courier series will highlight the approach SVVSD plans to take in addressing these challenges and implementing AI.