Education Hazards of Generative AI
A guide to avoiding common misconceptions about AI and education
Download here
Today Cognitive Resonance issues its first publication, titled the Education Hazards of Generative AI—you can download it through the links above. If this document resonates with you, I hope you will share it widely in your networks and via social media. The stakes here are high, and we should work to clarify misconceptions about how these tools work—and the education hazards they pose.
Education Hazards of Generative AI provides a basic scientific overview of how large-language models (LLMs) work and connects this knowledge to practical implications for educators. This document is intended as a resource for teachers, principals, school district administrators, parents, students, policymakers, and anyone else thinking about using generative AI for educational purposes.
The widespread commercial deployment of LLMs, also referred to as “chatbots,” has generated a tremendous amount of excitement, including in education. Already, teachers and administrators report using chatbots with increasing frequency. There is no shortage of hype about how LLMs will “revolutionize” education.
But although there are promising use cases for LLMs in education, there are also potential educational hazards involved with using them. Chatbots are tools and, as with any tool, the failure to understand how they work may result in using them for purposes they are not well-suited for. This document highlights areas of concern where misconceptions about how LLMs function may lead to ineffective or even harmful educational practices.
Education Hazards of Generative AI is intended as an introductory overview and is far from comprehensive. As a technology product, LLMs are continually being updated by the companies that deploy them, and our scientific understanding of how they function continues to evolve. That notwithstanding, and because educators are the professionals who bear the ultimate responsibility for instruction and student learning, we hope that this document is helpful in making decisions about whether or how to use generative AI in education today.
This document was co-authored by Benjamin Riley (Cognitive Resonance) and Paul Bruno (University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign). We are grateful to Amber Willis, Blake Harvard, Dan Willingham, Dylan Kane, Efrat Furst, Geoff Vaughan, Jane Rosenzweig, Jasmine Lane, Michael Pershan, Peter Greene, Sarah Oberle, Sean Trott, and Tom Mullaney for providing feedback on pre-publication drafts, along with other anonymous reviewers.
Citation:
Riley, B., & Bruno, P. (2024). Education hazards of generative AI. Cognitive Resonance.
Boy have you nailed it: "confusion between prediction and marketing." The problem is getting admin to read it, because, FOMO, "the future" (usually meaning their eye on their resume. The Chicago Public Schools AI for elementary schools is terrifying. Another reason for getting screens out of our primary classrooms. I'm trying to get my school interested in Maryanne Wolf's work...K-4 Reading Teacher
Love this resource. I've been trying to put together something of the kind based on my own substack postings - now I don't have to (and I will be recommending it widely).