There
is no denying that over the past few years, AI has heavily impacted our
culture. With the introduction of
sophisticated tools such as ChatGPT, the academic world has been confronted
with a very tricky dilemma. Teachers are
struggling to define what is acceptable and unacceptable when it comes to AI
assistance. Some are not opposed to its
use (under specific conditions) while others argue against students using it
entirely. And of course, many students
are fully taking advantage of these tools while their teachers continue to
argue. Yet there is a question that will
likely linger even well after the dust of this 21st century
pandemonium has subsided. Will AI
eventually replace human tutors—and perhaps even teachers? Indeed, such a question cannot be answered
easily, as there are many variables to consider. Nevertheless, it is certainly a question of
grave importance—and especially one that should not be disregarded as simply
fearmongering.
First,
let us examine what we—at the moment—do
currently know. According to a study
conducted by Intelligent.com, it
appears that students do in fact favor ChatGPT over human tutors. Out of the 3,017 high school/college students
surveyed, 85.38% preferred using ChatGPT.
Likewise, out of the 3,234 parents of younger children surveyed, 96%
preferred ChatGPT over human tutors.
Intelligent.com thus explains that “9 in 10 prefer studying with ChatGPT
over studying with a tutor.” But this
still doesn’t tell us enough.
Specifically, for what subjects do students depend upon ChatGPT? According to the same study, Math and “Hard”
Sciences were the top two. English and
Art/Music were the least common subjects for which students consulted ChatGPT (Intelligent.com). Perhaps this offers a glimmer of hope to
tutors in the branches of humanities, which—as the name implies—has a far
greater emphasis on the human aspect.
Still,
what is incredible (and equally frightening) about these trends is that ChatGPT
was only released as recently as November 30th, 2022 (Marr). One can only imagine where the technology
will be a decade from now—and how it will impact schooling across the globe.
Intelligent.com’s
article goes on to share the sentiment of a student named Johnson Adegoke: “As
a current student using ChatGPT, I have found it to be a helpful and convenient
tool for studying […] Unlike seeing a tutor, ChatGPT is available 24/7 and can
answer my questions immediately” (Intelligent.com). Once more, it should be noted that this is
far more representative of Math and “Hard” Science subjects, which possess
problems that only have objective/right-or-wrong answers. Thus, further studies would need to be
conducted as to how efficient ChatGPT and other AI tools are at helping
students with subject/opinionated answers to questions (such as one’s own
personal take on a piece of literature or music).
Notwithstanding,
the student’s response definitely gives an insight into a much larger trend—and
the thought process of many students alike.
They see convenience and instant answers to their academic inquiries. Even so, where students see a savior, many
teachers see a machine lacking the most important human elements. In an article advocating for human teachers
over artificial intelligence, author Sarah Hanawald explains the advantages of
human beings as instructors when she says:
AI
tools can help provide personalized learning for a student but only when
directed to do so by a skilled and empathetic teacher. AI cannot discern
emotions beyond a coded response, and even a bot “trained” to be supportive
will be limited when compared to a human teacher […] Teachers are flexible in
adapting their approach to their students’ varying needs and learning styles,
flexing their ability to read their students’ emotions, and respond accordingly
with empathy and support (Hanawald).
While this may certainly ring
true to many teachers and tutors alike, there are others who argue that the
cost of AI services such as ChatGPT is far cheaper than tutors—many of whom
charge hourly rates (Intelligent.com).
Thus, although the human element of a tutor is undeniable—parents and
students will likely choose the cheaper route—especially with the rising costs
of basic necessities thanks to inflation (Chiwaya; Milden). However, it should be
noted that many institutions offer free tutoring services to their
students—meaning that pricey, hourly rates do not necessarily have to be a concern. And, despite previous problems with funding,
there have been recent efforts starting back during the 2020 pandemic to fund
tutoring programs in schools by many state governments (Wall, et al.).
In
addition to these concerns, Harvard University began to implement an AI
instructor into their coding courses as recently as July of 2023 (NewsNation). Moreover, Sal Khan of the extremely
successful Khan Academy has also endorsed AI tutoring and believes it will have
positive, revolutionary impacts on global education (TED). Still, others would disagree. Special Education and Inclusive Learning
states that AI cannot help teach children “soft skills” and “behavioral/emotional
development.” Furthermore, they claim
that the development of emotional skills is also something AI cannot teach
children (Special Education and Inclusive Learning). Thus, it appears that many of the arguments
coming from tutors and teachers alike revolve around AI’s lack of genuine
empathy and moral support that a human can offer. Conversely, those in favor of AI—especially
students and parents alike—argue that AI is affordable and convenient. This consequently leads to another question:
is the sincere human element more important than expediency and lower prices?
According to an article from the National Library of
Medicine, a human teacher is not only a necessary element—but an extremely
crucial one—in the social and emotional development of young students. This is evident when the authors explain:
Teachers
of young students are charged with the task of guiding students toward
proficiency in a range of academic topics. At the same time, teachers in the
early grades often directly and indirectly instruct students in
social-emotional competence, such as how to get along with diverse peers and
strategies to focus on and follow directions […] [T]eachers are prime candidates
to consider as socializers of emotion-related behaviors (Valiente, et al.).
Again, the human aspect is
indeed instrumental in the development of students. Thus, to replace teachers and tutors with AI
instructors would risk children learning and developing the aforementioned soft
skills. For indeed, if especially young
students develop their social and emotional abilities through their
relationship with human teachers, how will these soft skills develop if their
teacher is merely a machine? It doesn’t
seem likely.
It’s also worth noting that as
far back as 2014—before this new age of AI commenced—technology had already
been a major concern for many people.
Morgan Hampton of Brigham Young University wrote about this at length in
an article entitled “Technology: Is it making kids anti-social?” One of the first problems Hampton addresses
is the decline and absence of personal relationships. She explains that such a void cannot be filled
with technology, as “[r]elationships are essential; humans are social
creatures. Human nature craves human interaction, and that interaction cannot
be effectively replaced by technology” (Hampton). Another critical factor Hampton brings up is
low self-confidence resulting from excessive reliance on technology; she
explains that “teaching children the value of personal relationships” is
ultimately what will secure their future in a world where technology is central
to daily life.
But while it is quite encouraging to see many people
recognizing the significance of human educators and their value in society,
there still remain trends that paint a rather grim picture of the future of education. For instance, Mark C. Perna of Forbes
explains that it is a field that very few young people wish to venture into—and
one of which few veteran teachers would recommend to younger generations. Poor workplace environments, few benefits,
and extremely low salaries are factors that have contributed to far less people
seeking to become educators (Perna). What’s equally worth noting is that,
according to neaToday, current educators are already anticipating leaving their
profession early while “[i]n the last 10 years alone, the number of people
completing traditional teacher-prep programs has dropped by 35 percent” (Flannery). It also does not help that educators—due to
these shortages—are experiencing “[…] higher levels of anxiety, stress and
burnout” (Walker).
With
this in mind, the question remains that if fewer people are becoming teachers—and
many teachers are leaving their profession behind—will the implementation of AI
instructors become more convenient and cost efficient? Although it is too soon to fully answer such
questions, these are scenarios that should nevertheless be paid close attention
to as this decade continues to unfold. Of
course, and as noted earlier, AI may likely be used more heavily in certain
branches of education than others.
Whereas Science and Math are shown to be ones for which students most
frequently use ChatGPT, students are less likely to use AI assistance with English
and Art/Music. Thus, AI taking over
tutoring roles in every field is not likely to happen all at once—nor
equally. But, with that being said, we
already see major universities like Harvard implementing AI instructors; this
should be concerning, as it certainly sets an historical precedent. The day might come when some individuals
propose AI as a solution to the increasing lack of educators. Humanity is undoubtedly at a crossroads—and
sooner or later, a choice will have to be made on how we wish to educate future
generations. And indeed, we will have to
choose soon.
Works Cited:
“How AI Could Save (Not Destroy) Education.” TED, 1 May 2023, https://youtu.be/hJP5GqnTrNo?si=HfujAL2eecuZ_Fcr.
“New Survey Finds Students Are Replacing
Human Tutors With ChatGPT.” Intelligent.com,
24 Oct. 2023, https://www.intelligent.com/new-survey-finds-students-are-replacing-human-tutors-with-chatgpt/.
“Why A.I will never replace teachers.” Special Education and Inclusive Learning, https://inclusiveteach.com/2023/07/08/why-a-i-will-never-replace-teachers/.
Accessed 4 Mar. 2024.
“Will AI robots replace teachers in the classroom?” NewsNation, 7 July 2023, https://youtu.be/LPOUal0Xvz8?si=SDzKTDHN0OZT_Apo.
Aldeman, Chad. “Why Are Fewer People Becoming Teachers?” Education Next, 28 Sep. 2022, https://www.educationnext.org/why-are-fewer-people-becoming-teachers/.
Chiwaya, Nigel, et al. “Inflation in America: Where are
prices rising and falling?” NBC News,
16 June 2022, https://www.nbcnews.com/data-graphics/inflation-tracker-how-much-prices-rising-us-consumers-n1296378.
Flannery, Mary Ellen. “Missing: Future Teachers in Colleges
of Education.” neaToday, 29 Mar.
2022, https://www.nea.org/nea-today/all-news-articles/missing-future-teachers-colleges-education.
Hampton, Morgan. “Technology: Is it making kids
anti-social?” The Daily Universe, 22
Aug. 2014,
https://universe.byu.edu/2014/08/22/technology-is-it-making-kids-anti-social/.
Hanawald, Sarah. “Why
Teacher Intelligence Will Always Matter More Than Artificial Intelligence.” Educational Records Bureau, 12 Sep.
2023, https://www.erblearn.org/blog/ai-wont-replace-teacher-intelligence/#:~:text=AI%20tools%20can%20help%20provide,compared%20to%20a%20human%20teacher.
Marr, Bernard. “A Short History Of ChatGPT: How We Got To
Where We Are Today.” Forbes, 19 May
2023, https://www.forbes.com/sites/bernardmarr/2023/05/19/a-short-history-of-chatgpt-how-we-got-to-where-we-are-today/?sh=574cf95a674f.
Milden, Dashia, et al. “Inflation Rose in January to 3.1%,
Dimming the Prospects for Interest Rate Cuts in March.” CNET, 14 Feb. 2024, https://www.cnet.com/personal-finance/banking/advice/inflation-interest-rates/.
Perna, Mark C. “No More Teachers: The Epic Crisis Facing
Education In 2024.” Forbes, 3 Jan.
2024, https://www.forbes.com/sites/markcperna/2024/01/03/no-more-teachers-the-epic-crisis-facing-education-in-2024/.
Valiente, Carlos, et al. “Emotion-Related Socialization in
the Classroom: Considering the Roles of Teachers, Peers, and the Classroom
Context.” National Library of Medicine,
1 Mar. 2021, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7041856/.
Wall, Patrick, et al. “Tutoring help reaches few students
despite nationwide push.” Chalkbeat,
10 March 2023, https://www.chalkbeat.org/2023/3/10/23629236/learning-loss-tutoring-students-pandemic-funds-covid/.
Walker, Tim. “Getting Serious About Teacher Burnout.” neaToday, 12 Nov. 2021, https://www.nea.org/nea-today/all-news-articles/getting-serious-about-teacher-burnout.