register to Chalkbeat New York’s free daily newsletter Get important news about New York City public schools delivered to your inbox.
Even though New York City withdrew at the last minute a controversial proposal for a new high school centered around artificial intelligence, parents, students and educators packed school board meetings this week to talk about AI anyway.
More than 100 New Yorkers testified during a nearly seven-hour meeting of the Education Policy Panel (PEP) earlier this week.
Community members repeatedly claimed that the Ministry of Education was deploying AI tools without clear rules, transparency, and sufficient knowledge of the technology. Students say AI is already reshaping classrooms, and monitoring methods such as digital toilet hall pass technology are already in use in 150 city schools. Educators expressed concern that the increased use of various technologies in schools is inconsistent with the city’s preliminary AI school policy announced in March.
One Park Slope parent approached Mike with two young children in tow, holding one in his arms and holding the other tightly in his hand.
“I’ve never been an activist before, but I feel very strongly about this. It’s starting. Gen Z is against AI, and I’m against AI. The city says AI is inevitable, but they won’t tell me what devices and apps my kids are using. Are you saying we’re spending our money to give our kids artificial intelligence?” she said to cheers at a packed rally Wednesday night.
PEP’s voting agenda had little to do with AI. It centered around the Department of Education’s capital plan, next year’s estimated budget, and the weight of the latest fair student funding that will shape the flow of money to schools. The commission also voted on 30 separate contract agreements, ranging from cafeteria equipment repairs to special education services.
But much of the seven-hour meeting was attended by parents, children, and educators protesting the city’s AI and education technology contract spending and the city’s interim AI policy. Proposals for next-generation high schools were removed from Wednesday’s agenda following backlash over the emphasis on AI and selective admissions, but speakers said those concerns would extend to future school plans.
“Many feel that AI is teaching a dangerous message that the outcome is more important than the learning process. Some of the most important learning happens when students struggle, make mistakes, ask questions, and improve over time,” said Julia Nassef, a student council member at Tottenville High School in Staten Island.
Discussions about AI have brought to the fore problems with the current Department of Education process.
Throughout the night, speakers expressed waning confidence in the Department of Education’s review process for AI tools and their ability to protect students, educators, and families from complex and rapidly changing technology.
Most of the speakers were against any kind of AI in the classroom.
Education Policy Committee Chairman Greg Faulkner acknowledged Wednesday that he is a “baby boomer” and has limited understanding of AI, and said he wants to engage more thoroughly with both local communities and the Department of Education on future AI-related proposals.
But he also believed that President Kamal Samuel’s move to withdraw the AI-focused school proposal for Next Generation High Schools was consistent with the school principal’s priorities to better incorporate and respond to community needs.
“Under the previous government, the general assumption was that the committee would vote in favor of all Department of Energy proposals. But the Prime Minister’s decision and the debate before and after Wednesday’s committee showed that the old model was no longer working,” Faulkner told Chalkbeat on Thursday.
Mr Faulkner said he was considering proposing changes to some of the Education Department’s policy-making processes due to “AI issues”. He said he would like to see the commission work more closely with the department’s AI policymakers, who have not been named, so that the commission can stay up to date on AI research and better share community concerns.
Department of Education officials said the initial AI guidance was developed by the department’s core academic and leadership team with input from stakeholders and various subcommittees within the department.
“I haven’t had any briefings on AI research, and I’m concerned about the suspension, but I don’t know enough about the technology,” Faulkner said.
Nassef, a student PEP member, said at the conference that many of his colleagues acknowledged that AI could help understand concepts in mathematics and science, for example, if used “deliberately.”
She called on the committee to “support clear, student-centered guidelines for AI implementation.”
The city’s framework, released last month, included no guidance on how or if students could use AI for homework, nor did it differentiate the use of AI by student grade level.
Panel greenlights controversial technology deal as AI policy delays
Of the 30 contract proposals up for vote, three included three education technology products. Only one person was rejected.
One of the approved contracts covered Kaplan’s entire line of K-12 digital learning products, a global education services company that recently rolled out AI add-ons to its digital test prep products. Several speakers who testified at Wednesday’s conference highlighted the company’s recent A privacy breach affecting the personal information of 1.4 million people in seven states. Despite these concerns, PEP approved the company’s $500,000 contract.
Representatives from Age of Learning, an AI-based software specializing in early childhood education, spoke at the conference in preparation for the contract vote. He assured panel members that the software “can be turned off at any time” because “teachers have complete control over what happens in the classroom.” This was the only contract that PEP voted against.
Naveed Hasan, the commission’s de facto technology expert who previously supported AI-focused high schools, announced at the meeting that he now supports a two-year moratorium on AI use in schools, saying the city needs more time to address data privacy infrastructure and learning concerns.
The terms of all current panel members expire at the end of June. The Department of Education’s full AI policy is also due to be announced in the same month, and the department is asking families and educators to comment on the initial framework until May 8.
Lizzie Walsh is a data fellow at Chalkbeat New York. She reports on education in New York City and produces data-driven stories across Chalkbeat’s national network. Please contact us at ewlsh@chalkbeat.org.
