Should we trust algorithms with teaching children?

Embracing machine learning and AI may make us a top English-speaking, digitally skilled labour market, but not necessarily a Vishwaguru

Should we trust algorithms with teaching children?

The brain—is wider than the sky—

For—put them side by side—

The one the other will contain

With ease—and you—beside

When Emily Dickinson wrote these lines in the 19th century, she was not confronted with the possibility-impossibility of god’s mind and the artificial mind known as artificial intelligence (AI). 

In the history of ideas, human consciousness is understood as and via mind, written with a small ‘m’. In contrast, the divine consciousness is interpreted and symbolised as God’s Mind with a capital ‘M’.  

The philosophical discourse perceives the human mind as a manifestation of god’s Mind. The human mind is characterised by the capabilities of having experience and reason, and God’s mind is to produce every experience and reason. 

With the advent of and advancements in artificial intelligence in the 21st century, the questions stand altered to whether the human mind can be as efficient as artificial intelligence or whether god’s Mind is as synchronised as AI. But is it so?

The human mind will learn and know with the help of another mind, or else we all will keep reinventing the wheel. The ‘human touch’ in learning must not be replaced with machine learning or artificial intelligence.

Artificial intelligence is bound to fascinate and guide us as the ‘alter’ mind or as God’s Mind. One day, we listen to a particular genre of music, and the next day, the artificial intelligence starts suggesting or feeding us with similar music, or if we ‘search’ a place for mere information, the next day, the AI starts suggesting to us how to reach and where to stay in that place. 

This ‘foresight’ and ‘foreboding’, which a human mind always developed in hindsight only, was considered a characteristic of God’s mind. It is now a feature of artificial intelligence for its capacity to work with numerous probabilities and algorithms. 

What knowledge means and what it means to know is not only epistemological but also shapes the world, social relations, hierarchies, stereotypes, prejudices, and utopia. 

We cannot delimit the definition of knowledge as mere information and its different permutations and combinations only. It will only validate another truism by Jean-François Lyotard that, in postmodern conditions. ‘Whatever cannot be translated into a computer’s language will lose its validity, reliability, and sanctity as knowledge’.

In the battle between the human mind, God’s mind, and artificial intelligence, the liberal political economy will vouch for artificial intelligence, as Tagore’s ‘where the mind is without fear and the head is held high’ individuals are neither appropriate nor desirable.

Developed in labs like circuits running on algorithms and codes, AI is essentially trained on data generated and captured by human actions and reactions under varied circumstances over a long period. AI learns by mimicking human or natural intelligence and is crafted by human minds and hands. Limited by the lack of emotional intelligence, scientists and technologists are now working to take AI to the next level by developing robots with hearts. 

AI is fast unfolding to rival humans and poses a serious challenge, if not an existential threat, to its own creator. So far, AI does what it is asked to do and does what it has been trained on. Presently, it lacks free will, a feature that primarily defines humans, but how would humans react when AI is trained enough to think independently and start acting on its own free will? 

These questions must seize the attention of the higher education fraternity. AI is no longer rare and is rapidly expanding its reach and accessibility. The question is whether it can potentially undermine human or natural intelligence. 

Artificial intelligence is not artificial in the sense that the word is commonly understood—something unreal, artificial, duplicate, and inferior to natural. It, in fact, has the potential of and is rapidly moving towards being a substitute for genuine human intelligence. Advancements in technology are threatening to replace humans in most sectors of the economy, including education. 

Aided by the compulsion of commerce, men are only hastening the process, much to their own detriment. Speaking specifically about India, the National Education Policy (NEP 2020) seeks to situate itself in ancient Indian ethos and values. 

Yet, it intends to rely heavily on transforming its teaching-learning process with the help of artificial intelligence and machines. Interestingly, most of the solutions the policy offers to the challenges of providing equitable access to quality education revolve around integrating technology. 

The growing expanse of the market-controlled economy of education compels cutting corners even on such critical components as teachers and teaching-learning resources, making recruitment and monetary compensation to the teachers the foremost causality. 

The overt emphasis on machine learning and AI may make us the largest English-speaking and digitally skilled labour market. But it will not make us the ‘Vishwaguru’, a status that the new education policy desperately desires and aggressively promotes vociferously. 

Learning and knowing are human endeavours with multiple contexts and processes, guided not only by the learner’s socioeconomic and historical-cultural background but also by the political economy of the state, the curricula, the evaluation process, and the teacher. 

AI is still living in its age of innocence. It neither gets angry nor has a sense of humour. It seriously offers sincere solutions to problems posed to it. It admits that it relies on human guidance for development, supervision, and ethical considerations and does require human oversight to ensure responsible and beneficial use. 

Can it be trusted for the education of children? AI asserts that trust should be approached cautiously and that human supervision and guidance are crucial to ensuring that AI-driven educational tools align with education goals, adhere to ethical standards, and provide appropriate content.

(Navneet Sharma teaches at the Central University of Himachal Pradesh. Furqan Qamar, former adviser for education in the Planning Commission, teaches at Jamia Millia Islamia)