In May, the Vancouver School District announced plans to integrate Microsoft Copilot, a generative AI chatbot, into classrooms starting this fall. The decision, made with virtually no public input or discussion, represents a fundamental shift in education policy. Critics argue that administrators are rushing to adopt an untested technology without evidence of its educational benefits, while ignoring growing research that suggests AI harms learning.
Lack of Evidence and Parental Concerns
Paul Keeling, a commentator on education issues, writes that the Vancouver School District is not listening to parents' concerns. Instead, the district's plan is to give the technology to teachers and students and let them figure it out, like guinea pigs. School administrators have not answered basic questions about how AI will help students discern truth, retain knowledge, feel pride in their work, or foster emotional and intellectual growth.
According to Keeling, even if AI chatbots were a reliable source of information—which they are not—there is growing evidence that AI harms learning. AI use is correlated with worse learning outcomes, poorer critical thinking, reduced ability to accurately judge one's own performance, and reduced ability to discern misinformation over time. AI chatbots tend to agree with users even when users are factually incorrect.
Research on AI's Negative Impact
Research indicates that when the AI crutch is taken away, students who have used AI tend to perform worse than those who have never used it. Using AI as a sole study aid is worse for comprehension and retention than just taking conventional notes. The majority of students use AI to solve problems for them, rather than to learn. When adult professionals rely on AI tools, they lose skills.
Keeling notes the irony that despite clichés about teaching critical thinking, school administrators are not critically evaluating an untested and unproven technology before launching it. When the negative effects of smartphones were understood, their use in classrooms was restricted. The burden of proof clearly lies with those pushing for the new technology.
Administrators' Vague Justifications
In a CBC interview on June 3, Vancouver School Board associate superintendent Pedro da Silva and Surrey school district superintendent Mark Pearmain were both adamant that Microsoft Copilot must be deployed in schools, but did not explain why or how it will be used. Both echoed familiar AI industry marketing instead.
“For us, it’s now an opportunity for the teachers and the students to work through how to leverage the tool to support the learning environment,” da Silva said. Pearmain said he is “excited to see the opportunities that AI brings that can enhance a student’s experience in school,” with no explanation how that might occur.
The 'Genie' Argument
The main justification for AI chatbots in schools, echoed by Pearmain, is: “We can’t put the genie back in the bottle.” Keeling calls this argument spurious. Any technology, once invented, cannot be uninvented. But it does not follow that the “genie” must go everywhere and be welcomed into every aspect of human life and functioning. It certainly need not be rushed into K-12 education with no real understanding of its educational, psychological and social impacts.
