In the early 2000s, it would have been rare to find more than a few desktop computers in a classroom. 20 years later, a classroom would seem incomplete without a crowd of students relying on personal laptops and multiple other devices to get through the school day. In more recent years, those laptops have become a means to use artificial intelligence in the classroom.
AI was first defined in 1955 by Stanford University emeritus professor John McCarthy as “the science and engineering of making intelligent machines.” Although the definition has not changed fundamentally in the past 70 years, the technology has continued to develop and reveal its negative impacts, from damage to the environment to a loss of creativity in young people. Policies surrounding AI must change throughout society as a whole, but first the use of the technology must be controlled in classrooms.
As research continues to deepen and environmental impacts of AI reveal themselves, it will soon become apparent that the presence of AI in society will be short-lived. Something so environmentally detrimental cannot continue to infiltrate society at such a caliber; either nationwide policies concerning AI will change, or soon there won’t be a future for the technology to permeate.
The United Nations Environment Programme summarized some of the major environmental effects of AI: 1) the data centers which contain AI infrastructure create toxic electronic waste and consume an outrageous amount of water, 2) they rely on rare, unsustainably-mined elements and minerals and 3) one search on ChatGPT uses 10 times more electricity than a Google Search.
Encouraging the use of something with such a bleak future is bad intellectual practice, especially when the uses are so trivial and unimportant. According to the Harvard Graduate School of Education, “of generative AI users ages 14-22 surveyed, 31% said they use it to ‘make pictures or images,’ while 16% ‘make sounds or music’ and 15% say they use it to write code.” The irony of these students claiming to use AI for creative expression is that there is little to no creativity required to use AI. Telling AI to create an image is not art, telling AI to write a song is not musicianship.
Some teachers claim AI has more use in a classroom than simply allowing students to play with technology. The Center on Reinventing Public Education found around 18% of K-12 teachers use AI in their teaching, whether to help students brainstorm essay topics or answer class-related questions. However, this percentage reveals a concerning disparity when compared to the amount of students who utilize AI.
The article from the Harvard Graduate School of Education reported approximately 51% of people ages 14-22 have used generative AI. This disparity in numbers disputes the argument that using AI in classrooms prepares students to use the technology effectively and ethically. In reality, more students use it than teachers teach it, meaning most students have free, unsupervised reign to do whatever they want with the technology, often to cheat on assignments and waste time while wasting energy.
AI is both a plague on the environment and entirely unnecessary in classrooms. Students have been learning and growing their intellect for decades without the use of AI, and the introduction of AI in classroom settings reduces the need for students to think outside the box and learn things for themselves. The environmental problems with AI span much wider than just their use within classrooms, but those spaces will soon become a breeding ground for a new generation who will fix those problems, if only the technology itself stops standing in the way of their creative thinking and problem solving skills.
Sophia Rooksberry is a junior studying journalism. Please note that the views and opinions of the columnist do not reflect those of The Post. Want to talk more about it? Let Sophia know by tweeting her @sophiarooks_.