AI classrooms require stronger human judgment skills

New York City’s decision to allow the use of generative artificial intelligence in elementary, middle and high schools has triggered a strong backlash from parents and education experts.

The New York City Department of Education (DOE) recently issued administrative guidelines for introducing AI into classrooms. The policy quickly drew criticism, with many parents and specialists calling for a full suspension or a significant slowdown in its rollout.

Roughly three and a half years after the arrival of ChatGPT first prompted caution in schools, New York has sharply reversed its approach. On March 24, the DOE released what it called “traffic light guidelines,” encouraging teachers to use AI in lesson planning and administrative work. Officials said the goal is to improve efficiency so teachers can devote more time to individual students. The city also plans to develop separate guidance on student use of AI based on feedback from schools.

Opposition surfaced publicly on April 16, when about 2,200 parents and activists gathered outside New York City Hall carrying a petition. They urged Mayor Zohran Mamdani to slow the pace of AI adoption in classrooms and called for at least a two-year delay in implementing the policy.

Parents say their concern is not technological progress itself, but the impact on learning. They warn that if teachers rely heavily on AI to design lessons, students could become passive recipients of algorithm-driven instruction rather than active participants in the classroom.

According to Fortune, a group of about 250 experts, including child development specialists and physicians, has also recommended a five-year pause on introducing generative AI into schools across North America. Cognitive scientists in particular have raised concerns about its effects on brain development in children.

They argue that AI chatbots are designed to provide consistently positive feedback, which may weaken children’s ability to develop judgment through real social interaction, including conflict with peers. Others warn that repeated reliance on AI to bypass problem-solving could gradually undermine independent thinking, especially during critical stages of cognitive development.

Researchers also caution that outsourcing thinking to AI could interfere with the development of neural pathways that are built through independent reasoning and sustained problem-solving.

At the center of the debate is a broader question of how education should evolve in an AI-driven era. Some argue that schools should focus more on building technological literacy and familiarity with AI tools rather than restricting their use.

Others counter that schools should place greater emphasis on reading, writing and critical thinking, arguing that these skills will ultimately determine how students evaluate and make use of AI-generated output.

The global technology industry reflects a similar shift. As artificial intelligence systems increasingly outpace humans in coding speed, entry-level developers focused on implementation have faced layoffs and shrinking job prospects. At the same time, companies are placing greater emphasis on workers who can define product direction and navigate complex decision-making.

Where technical work once centered on writing code line by line, the focus has moved toward identifying which AI-generated outputs are meaningful and determining overall strategy. Analysts say that ability is not developed through automation itself, but through sustained practice in reading, writing, reasoning and discussion. In that sense, some educators argue the most essential skill in the AI era may be unexpectedly basic: the ability to think independently, with pencil and eraser still in hand.


Hyun-Seok Lim lhs@donga.com