My Critical Perspective
Over 280 educational technologies incorporate AI as a core component of the product, as of September 2023 (Horn, 2024). Let me say it again: 280 educational technology products use AI as a core component of their product. Even as an Educational Technology Doctoral candidate and an advocate for technology use in the classroom, I find that number to be astounding. It’s confounding, overwhelming, and enlightening all at the same time. And yet, educators cannot run from it. AI is here to stay, it’s rapidly evolving, growing exponentially, and somehow we educators are faced with the impossibility of meeting the moment for the next generation. 

Neil Selwyn comments on the AI discourse in his book Should Robots Replace Teachers?, “It is worrying that the growing presence of AI in classrooms is not already provoking great consternation and debate throughout education,” (2019, p. 119). While Selwyn’s perspective of AI is a necessary critique of those enamored with AI in education, I would argue a mere 5 years later, this debate is here. As a Middle School Social Studies teacher, the AI conversation discourse from colleagues has landed them into two separate categories: those who have vehemently sworn off of AI and those who are advocates for its use in the classroom. This divide is sometimes departmentalized, sometimes age-dependent, experience-dependent, and philosophical. No matter, the divide exists. Teachers who have embraced AI, using it within the planning and preparation or differentiating their lesson, or even experimenting with students using it as a tool for research or essay-revising. While other teachers have sworn off of it, citing it as a cheating tool with concerns regarding student privacy and its inappropriateness for students, with or without parental consent. The divide exists and the problem is: they are both right, and both so wrong. Maybe it is the History teacher in me that embraces the critical perspective, but my perspective is this: we as teachers owe it to ourselves, to the field, and, most importantly, the students we teach, to meet the other side and embrace the tough conversations so we can bridge the gap and close the divide. 

The larger concern is the continued rapid development of AI only serves to extend this divide even further. As tools become more advanced and more equipped, they become more difficult to navigate for non-tech-savvy educators who have already sworn off the idea. As time goes on, educators who have embraced AI will continue to have it play a role in their classrooms more and more, further becoming integrated with AI literacy. Most impacted however in all of this are the students. Students born in this generation will never experience education without AI’s influence. Should they be shielded from it despite the obvious role it will play in their lives? Does education make the effort to change the minds of those who have sworn off of it? These factors create an important conversation that is imperative for schools to address. The mixed messaging only serves to confuse students in preparation of a world they must be ready for but also the staff who are meant to play a role in developing students as critically-thinking, engaged citizens in the 21st century. 

To address this divide, the following questions need to be considered: 

1. What effect on school morale and climate does this difference in philosophy take on stakeholders?
2. Is there a common ground that can be achieved between these two groups and what does that look like?
3. What discourse is required of educational technology including AI to support both groups in achieving a common ground?
4. What responsibility do school districts share in shaping the conversation about AI use in the classroom?

The conversation then shifts to how we address these questions and this divide between educators. Literature points to professional development for AI training not being sufficient enough for most educators but also being a necessary component to educators’ self-efficacy in using AI (Konecki, Baksa, & Konecki, 2024; Maura & Carvalho, 2024). These dissenting findings require a transformation in the professional development provided by school districts in AI. Most AI professional developments in my experience highlight a new EdTech tool and how to use it, showing off the capabilities and what it can do for the teacher in planning or in the classroom. This experience fails to address two major problems in regard to this divide:

• Showing educators who have sworn off AI how to use an AI tool does not change their philosophy in regard to AI. 
• Educators who have already embraced AI do not need to be convinced on the use of AI further in instructing its use in the classroom. 

Selwyn states, “Developing technology use should be a collective responsibility for all staff, students and parents,” (Selwyn, 2019). Professional Development needs to shift from the advertising of a shiny new tool to a thought-provoking, philosophical discourse for educators to consider the benefits and consequences of using AI in the classroom, for all stakeholders. As highlighted previously, the abundance of tools in the space leaves no short of resources to try and implement but it is the decision-making process of implementing AI that needs a deep dive and consideration. Formatting discussion-based professional developments aid in educators thinking critically and formulating a more nuanced perspective of AI as opposed to the one-note stance many have taken. These discussions also change the roles of professional development instructors to facilitators and for educators to active participants in their own development. 

Formats like Fishbowls, community circles, and socratic seminars allow for the sharing of perspectives and challenging of ideas which is needed to address this divide. These learner-centered formats also allow for a model for educators to consider within their own classrooms when discussing AI with their students. They also allow for takeaways and opportunities of reflection for teachers to be the life-long learners they urge their students to be. These formats also empower educators to have their voices heard in important conversations that shape the instruction of their classrooms. 

The nuance of AI needs to be reflected in its professional development for teachers. To bridge the divide between the Anti-AI educators and the Pro-AI educators, schools need to facilitate an open dialogue of what can, should, and will look like for the students in their classrooms. The divide continues to grow and AI tools continue to be created and evolve. The way we inform our educators and develop them professionally needs to include them as a part of the conversation so we can achieve a common ground of understanding and build the environment to support students’ needs in facing a fast-developing AI world. 

Reflection

Much of my focus throughout the DET program has been based on what I have seen throughout my own teaching experience. I have seen the divide in my own experience working with both young teachers and experienced teachers and while I considered evaluating a specific educational technology, I felt more compelled to speak to the perspective that I have been developing in the last 6 years. This decision allowed me to articulate not only my own experience but what I have developed in my time as a Doctoral student. It allowed me to create a connection and really apply the skills developed in my classes and think critically about what I am experiencing in regards to AI in my own school. 

I attempted an infographic at first, but felt it was not right for the perspective I was trying to convey. I attempted a blog post/op-ed instead as it provided me the opportunity to include anecdotal experience as a component of my perspective. As a result, I made it a priority in this article to illustrate the perspective that I have developed from my teaching experience. I also made it a point to provide opposing perspectives which many readers could identify within themselves. This allows the audience to reflect on their own perspective and consider their role in the divide. 

This essay helped me go through the process of developing my own critical perspective which has changed a number of times so far in the DET program. I believe I have settled into a perspective that is aimed at the needs of teachers, and providing multiple perspectives for educators in their use of technology. And it has helped shape my own interests in research of what I plan to investigate. Technology and AI specifically are forces that teachers cannot ignore and I feel there is a need to address these concerns through adequate professional development that truly meets those needs. 

I intend to develop professional development opportunities within my school based on this perspective outlined in this essay. I am hopeful to run this professional development next school year to support my school’s initiative in incorporating AI. I also intend to focus my research on professional development perceptions including exploring various types of professional development in regards to AI as well as what factors play a role in AI perception for educators. These focuses will not only serve my interests within my career but hopefully provide necessary research for the rapid developing field of AI. 

References

1. Horn, M. B. (2024). AI is officially here, there, everywhere, and nowhere: Districts playing catch up can still adopt sound policies for AI. Education Next, 24(3), 80–83. ​
2. Konecki, M., Baksa, T., & Konecki, M. (2024). Teachers’ Perception of AI and Their Attitudes Towards AI: Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Computer Supported Education, 564–568. https://doi.org/10.5220/0012739300003693 
3. Moura, A., & Carvalho, A. A. A. (2024, February). Teachers’ perceptions of the use of artificial intelligence in the classroom. In International conference on lifelong education and leadership for all (ICLEL 2023) (pp. 140-150). Atlantis Press.
4. Selwyn, N. (2019). Should Robots Replace Teachers? AI and the Future of Education. Polity Press.
5. Selwyn, N. (2019). Teachers and technology: Time to get serious. Impact Journal of the Chartered College of Teaching.