I closely follow the ongoing discussions about AI and its role in education, and I recognize the diverse perspectives surrounding its use. In full transparency, I am a user of AI technologies and have found AI invaluable in my work as a learning space designer and consultant. I also believe AI holds significant potential to be applied to teaching and learning in meaningful ways. However, many educators and others remain skeptical, as there are numerous concerns surrounding AI technology, including its environmental impact, the bias inherent in LLM training processes, the occurrence of AI hallucinations, privacy issues, AI literacy, and even the fear that AI might foster metacognitive laziness in students. That is just a start.
Of course, understanding these issues and thoughtfully considering them is essential to the future use of AI in schools. Developing policies and guidelines is also crucial. But in the end, I’m not sure any of this will realistically matter that much for the day-to-day use of AI in schools. I’m very serious. History is on my side on this. Let me explain.
My argument: I believe that the use of AI technologies in school will mirror the use of other disruptive technologies that have come before. And that means a fragmented, inconsistent, low-level use of the technology where the tool's potential is rarely realized.
To provide additional context for my argument, I have been in or around schools for 37 years. When I started teaching in 1986, classroom technology consisted of an overhead projector, a slide projector, 16 mm films, and the infamous opaque projector. We didn’t even have a single copy machine in the school. Over the years, I witnessed the emergence of the microcomputer, the Internet, the World Wide Web, 1:1 programs, and makerspaces and their associated technologies. I also spent 12 years as an instructional technology coordinator at the district and school level. My comments here reflect my experience of those 37 years.
Over that time, and across my varied experiences in and around education, some consistent patterns of technology use support my perspective. This perspective is from my experience, and I understand there are exceptions to what you are about to read. So, here are the patterns that I believe support my argument about the future use of AI in schools; you may disagree:
Developing a strategic plan that addresses complex needs is challenging for most schools. Developing a strategic plan that effectively addresses the complex needs of a school community is no small task, and one is needed to support the effective use of AI in schools. While having a mission, vision, and even a Portrait of a Graduate can provide a strong foundation and are necessary, the critical focus of strategic planning should be on developing the teaching and learning experience at the classroom level.
When working with clients, I often ask them to articulate their expectations for daily classroom experiences—what they envision as the ideal student classroom experience. Surprisingly, many struggle to provide a clear answer. This inability highlights a critical gap in aligning strategic goals with the lived reality of teaching and learning at the classroom level.
It's important to acknowledge that long-range planning is not typically a core strength for most schools. This is not a criticism but an acknowledgment of their need balanced against their skill set. Creating a meaningful and actionable plan requires specialized expertise that schools may not have (why consultants get hired) and a nuanced understanding of connecting aspirational goals to on-the-ground implementation.
For AI, I think most schools will simply adopt an AI turnkey solution, have a day or two of professional development, and then make it available to teachers - rather than do the difficult work of translating policies and guidelines into instructional frameworks for classroom-level use. Here it is; use it if you want, and then we can check the AI box.
As a result, there is not a consistent and strategic application of technology to teaching and learning in schools. The lack of a consistent, strategic approach to using technology to support teaching and learning has led to significant disparities in what students experience at school. By leaving technology use to individual teachers’ discretion, gaps have emerged in students’ opportunities to engage meaningfully with technology tools. A student’s exposure to and opportunity to learn with technology often depends more on their teachers’ interest and comfort level with technology than on a cohesive, school-wide vision. This inconsistency undermines efforts to provide all students equal and equitable access to technology-enhanced learning opportunities.
Technology use in schools has always been optional. No one in the schools I worked in required or expected me to use technology with kids. I was never evaluated on my use, and I never had an administrator sit down with me to ask how I used technology. It was okay to use it, but it was also OK for any teacher to ignore it. It was one of the tools we could use if we wanted, regardless of the needs of kids who had to learn about these technologies and how they would impact their lives.
In many cases, optional means no thanks. And, if it's optional, how would you ever evaluate the systemic impact on the teaching and learning experience? Will AI use be optional in your school?
I believe that a strategic plan must translate into a system-wide expectation of use by all.
Strategic professional learning programs to advance the use of technology in schools are often missing/inconsistent/ineffective. A strategic plan should prioritize how the organization will develop its understanding of artificial intelligence. Without such a plan, professional learning experiences in most schools related to technology often default to in-service days, 'Technology Tuesdays,' or summer courses—approaches that may lack depth and continuity. Like with technology use, where participation from some teachers may be inconsistent or lacking, this type of professional development results in an uneven level of understanding among a school's educators, contributing to an inconsistent application of technology to teaching and learning.
A classic example of this is the learning experience of the pandemic, where the unequal skill set with technology manifested an inability to create compelling learning opportunities during remote learning.
The good news? Schools are capable of sustained and systemic professional development. I’ve seen this done with curriculum adoption, for example. I’m sure there are other examples. Let’s apply this model to AI adoption, where a professional development sequence focuses on understanding current reality, perceptions and beliefs about AI, realistic approaches to classroom use, and understanding how to evaluate use. Include students in PD opportunities. Include everyone. No more committees, but develop design teams that participate together during PD. Have all of that as an expectation that promotes systemic growth and improvement.
Most applications of technology to teaching and learning do not leverage the potential of technology. I recently saw a keynoter at a technology conference encourage teachers to start using AI by writing emails to parents. I guess you have to start somewhere, but recommendations like that should be an insult to professional educators who are capable of so much more. But this shouldn’t be unexpected - most of the discussion around AI use in schools focuses on productivity issues and saving teachers time. If you are familiar with AI, you know there is much more to AI than that, and the exciting applications of AI are related to the human-AI intersection and how the unique characteristics of both become a symbiotic relationship where AI supports - and elevates - what humans can accomplish.
There are other examples of where the potential of technology has failed to be realized. Take 1:1 laptop programs that have not had the impact they could have. The school's makerspace is another example, where the intent of the space is to do robotics, programming, and other maker-type experiences that have a shelf life. You can only make so many Makey Makey banana pianos. A better approach is to have a space where students can explore their passions, build things, take them apart and rebuild them, where they can follow their curiosity rather than being told what to be curious about.
So, where does that leave us? Significant cultural hurdles relating to the role and application of technology in schools must be addressed if AI is to have a wide-ranging impact. In my opinion, a strategic plan that includes policy, guidelines, instructional strategies, professional development, and assessment is a first step. Time and resources need to be allocated to actualize such a plan.
AI must be more than just a productivity tool - have a more imaginative vision of what this technology can be! Everyone has to understand it and apply it to their work. There has to be an expectation of use, and the right supports put into place to make that happen. There needs to be ongoing assessment of that use and course correction of progress along the way that is evidence-informed. Students have to be involved, and teachers need to try things, share those things with their colleagues, and, in the process, create an emergent and developing understanding of AI + learning in the school. Have the courage to go beyond the expectation that this is a tool and teachers can use it or not -understanding AI is too critical to your student's future to have such low expectations.
The future of AI in education depends on educators breaking free from past patterns and embracing the transformative potential of this technology. What if we reimagined AI not as an optional tool, but as an essential element of teaching and learning? It is possible to imagine a future where every teacher feels knowledgeable and confident enough to apply AI technologies, creating experiences where AI serves as a partner in the learning process.
Educators have the power to shape this narrative. But it will require a commitment to asking big questions: How can AI amplify human capacities? How can AI inspire a culture of innovation rather than merely streamline routine tasks? The opportunity is immense but requires bold leadership, strategic planning, and a willingness to experiment, fail, and grow.
The challenge: What steps will you take to ensure that AI becomes a transformative tool, fostering new ways to learn, innovate, and create, rather than just another missed opportunity?