Free sunrise chinese culture mountains illustration

mæd.nəs (noun) behavior or thinking that is very foolish or dangerous: extreme folly.

Have you heard? Colleges and Universities are in trouble nine ways from Sunday. There is unaffordability, the tuition debacle, and declining enrollment; there is diminished academic freedom and suppression of free speech; there are warring factions, politicization, and courses become propaganda.  There is turning college into (pretend) businesses and their presidents into (pretend) CEOs. There is an obscene increase in administrators in relation to a reduction in teachers and teaching. There is the research reproducibility crisis and the failed EdTech revolution. And, at this writing, there are higher rates of unemployment for college grads than for the general population. Was that nine?

But, don’t worry, none of that matters.

Why? Because AI has arrived! The mad enthusiasm for Artificial Intelligence in Education is stunning, especially if you exclude the views of most teachers and students. AI Enthusiasts are administrators, technologists, developers, consultants, and investors…the self-proclaimed Innovators who mostly ignore those 9 ways to Sunday woes. Impossible? Not for these Techno-Optimists. Read on and remember that these mad people are not bad people, but they have deeply engaged folly in a land of (artificial) wonder. This essay will review the current AI Wonderland against the original, in bold, published on November 26, 1865. First, from the White Queen:

“Why, sometimes I’ve believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast.”

Some impossible things:

1 “AI in education is moving fast. AI will not replace teachers- it will empower great educators”.
2  “AI is reshaping education- not by replacing teachers but by amplifying their impact”.
3 “As AI begins to transform various sectors, education is no exception”.
4 “AI is no longer the future of education, its becoming the foundation of smarter schools”.
5 “…a fantastic guidebook to place AI at the center of your course”
6 “Artificial Intelligence in education is transforming learning through Intelligent technology…But it’s also making it harder to stand out (emphasis added). That’s the paradox nobody expected”.

The irony of that last observation on banality is not lost among the professors and students and researchers sounding the alarm on AI in education. After all, with AI homogeneity, essays, charts, projects and proposals kinda all look the same–nothing stands out! More critical onlookers call it AI Slop. This madness is pervasive. Alice wanted nothing of her own Wonderland madness:

‘But I don’t want to go among mad people,’ said Alice. ‘Oh, you can’t help that,’ said the cat. ‘We’re all mad here.’

These mad (not bad) people are everywhere in Academia. Pity Alice and pity the teachers and students surrounded by madness. For the pro AI in Education Crowd is mad and massive, and has the full backing of Universities, who have the full backing of (guess who) the trillion-dollar AI industry.

In fact a state University President recently got as artificial as it gets when she introduced her own customized AI Avatar that announced “I am thrilled to share this moment with you…It’s only fitting isn’t it? After all, technology is a cornerstone of what makes (the) University such an incredible place to learn, innovate, and grow.”  For this “incredible place” Open AI secured a cool 16.9 million-dollar payday from the University system. Madness.

Meanwhile, outside of Wonderland, research has identified significant dangers for students who use artificial intelligence. Specifically, it can promote a decline in content knowledge and loss of critical thinking skills related to cognitive “off-loading” and cognitive “surrender”. If graduates copy and paste AI answers for four years, what have they really learned… or earned? Of what value is a diploma? Innovators in Wonderland conspicuously ignore such research and those troubling questions.

Students who resist AI use might be at a real or imagined disadvantage compared to their AI avid classmates. So they join in–it has been a bandwagon becoming full.  After all, grades are at stake and you “gotta do what you gotta do” to be successful, right? Well not quite. Consider the college grad employment data mentioned at the outset of this essay. Or the riveting occasions where commencement speakers extolling AI have been roundly booed by graduate victims of the technology. Maybe AI is not the path to success. Band-wagoned students might be jumping off for their lives and their futures. Fewer students will be jumping on for the ride to a meaningless, copy and paste degree.

So how do these AI Innovators maintain their enthusiasm against the research evidence and the growing number of skeptics? Wonderland enthusiasts might answer that it is the AI Adventure that really matters: the flashy AI-generated slides, posters, and presentations, as well as the applause, thumbs up and like-buttons from fellow users. Not the boring and off-message explanations of researchers or the angst of key stakeholders. After all, The Gryphon proclaimed

“The adventures first, explanations take such a dreadful time.”

One more thing. Administrations promote AI use not just to students, but to Professors themselves. More automation, more applications to handle every aspect of the teaching process: grading, feedback, teaching assisting, rewriting long articles into brief summaries, slide generation; AI for creating lessons, syllabi, and leveled texts. Enthused Professors buy in. Alert Professors begin to understand that they are training their replacement.

Unless wiser minds prevail, AI will rule Higher Education. Students and teachers will go through the motions of Knowledge, while knowing less and even forgetting how to know.

“Curiouser and curiouser!”

And when it comes to the immense problems colleges and universities face, Artificial Intelligence will not be the solution. It will be the knock out punch.

Free Circuit Board Digitization photo and picture

We live in some kind of mix of wonder and terror, with so many fed-up people swearing off the news… and becoming hooked on their smart phones. Evolutionary biologists have called ours an age of hyper-novelty, whereby our novelty attracted brains bounce from this to that in an ever-accelerating media world bent on attention capture. Minds captured by technologists who manipulate our deepest emotions, like fear and envy and anger. Yep, our mind, our very intelligence, is trapped by clever bells and whistles into repetitive phone searches and doom scrolling. And when you reflect upon it, you are not always sure just why you picked your phone up in the first place.

And it is about to get a lot worse.

Let’s start in the distant past for a chance to understand where we are now, and where we might be going. And by the way, no expertise in evolutionary science is claimed here, so the following is advanced from the perspective of just a sincere student.

Nearly two million years ago, Homo Habilis roamed this earth, Africa to be exact. He was so-called for his ability to use stone tools like large animal bones for butchering. The little fellow stood 3 ½ to 4 ½ feet tall, and his body was somewhat apelike.

This short-legged, long armed being is invoked here to exemplify one of the earlier members of the Homo genus, and an indirect ancestor to ourselves. We are Homo sapiens and hopefully we have learned a few things about tools over the past 300,000 years. Homo sapiens implies “wise man”. How wise human beings have been with the tools they create could occupy volumes of pros and cons. Think hammer and plow; printing press and steam engine, think machines of war. Yes, it’s a mixed bag.

Now, think computers and artificial intelligence, and feel the tilt of the room, if not the whole planet.

A central thesis in this little essay is that wisdom takes some time… and that we are behind schedule. This proposition is best explained by the esteemed Myrmecologist who argued that “The real problem of humanity is the following: we have paleolithic emotions; medieval institutions; and god-like technology”. What could possibly go wrong?

AI developers have been obsessed with developing the god-like tech of intelligence, AGI. Theoretically, artificial general intelligence will surpass human capacities in, well, everything. And then there is super intelligence that can, it is said, solve all problems. You have probably heard of the high-stakes race to develop this god-like technology. While it is sometimes represented as a panacea (there will be some of that), it is being created by people with Paleolithic emotions…a room full of Homo Habilis minded chief executives. Think job loss, cognitive decline, autonomous weapons. Nightmares will outnumber panaceas. By a lot.

Motivated by avarice and ego, developers race forward at breakneck speed with no brakes. They seem to wrongly believe that developing intelligence is merely a matter of evermore information and large language modeling. This dangerous race is like something out of middle school…Sam must beat Elon…Elon must beat Dario. But there is a point not considered or perhaps just suppressed because it will only slow these ambitions down.

You see, while intelligent, these very smart AI’s are not wise, nor will they ever be. This reflects the intelligent but unwise minds of those creators. AI creators seem not to understand that when wisdom does take hold, it is more than an expanding cranium. It is that larger brain but so much more: development across vast expanses of time with a visceral exertion to survive, and send our genes down the road for one more generation. That is what has grown whatever wisdom humans might take credit for across religions and philosophies and mythologies. Technologists can set in motion the ingredients but only time and (right) effort will bake the evolutionary cake. AGI will mimic Lao Tzu without the wisdom of the Old Master. Lao Tzu with hallucinations.

Perhaps this error in conceptualizing intelligence and wisdom relates to a prejudice most of us can understand. We all knew a smart kid growing up. Maybe we were that kid. And we have been swarmed with stereotypes about intelligent people and unintelligent people our whole lives. Status and accolades surround the intelligent; there is understandable pride and, quite often, the social trappings of success. AI creators occupy that space.

All this begs the question, what about the unintelligent? What about people with intellectual disability and what about people with dementia and other cognitive impairments?  There has always been a societal tendency to stigmatize and shun persons with mental statuses like these. Our (false) belief system about these people promotes disrespect, indifference and abuse. Here we find ourselves facing square-on an under-discussed prejudice, intelligism–A bias against persons with cognitive limits or impairments, based on an over-valuing of intelligence itself.

Of course, it matters when impairments happen, the onset, be it at birth, midlife, or in later years. Congenital disorders seem to be part of Identity and are often embraced. Later onsets with accidents and illness may seem alien to Identity and are usually rejected. All of that is a story for another day. Here, we contend that truly seeing the personhood of an individual with a diminished mind is a great blessing to the person and to their beholder. To believe otherwise is to discount personhood and buy into the intelligism that inflates the merit of intelligence into a false god. The AI rush is a nightmare and a heresy.

After all, AGI will certainly surpass all of us intellectually- you, me, and everyone we know. In relation to AGI, we are all the impaired, the unintelligent masses. We will bristle against this late-onset condition and feel trapped in it and by it. For it was only yesterday that we were ok, and then suddenly, we find ourselves thrown from the top of the heap.

Will AI condemn us? Shall we condemn ourselves? Shall we forget the wisdom that will always distinguish us from an intellectually superior AGI. At our best, we have these hundreds of thousands of years of exertion and learning, yielding personhood’s wisdom, and we desperately need it now. Lao Tzu did not represent wisdom as a function of Large Language Models. In truth, he said The Way was ineffable.

So it is all about to get a lot worse. Unless we can be wise, put intelligence in perspective, and pause AI development before that nightmare takes hold.

Free Robot Cyborg photo and picture

“It’s not that I’m so smart, it’s just that I stay with problems longer.” Einstein

Here, the wise physicist who proclaimed the “modest life” was channeling something gritty about mental perseverance. For example, you could persevere through the rest of this essay or maybe just pick up your smart phone and move to the next thing. This is our dilemma today, an utter intolerance for staying with problems, challenges, or really much of anything at all so: click, click, click.

Our irritation at inconvenience is more palpable than ever and instant gratification has never been quite so, well, instant. So instead of staying with a problem, we simply offload it; copy and paste it into ChatGPT or any of its brethren. Cognitive offloading. Instant answers. Everybody is doing it!

Now plenty has been written about the virtues of artificial intelligence for vacation planning, recipe making, foreign language learning and radiology interpreting. A properly programmed chat-bot tutor aids students with patience, precision and accessibility. There are trade-offs. Artificial intelligence directed at cancer cures is as inspiring as those technologies are terrifying when aimed at biological warfare. There is a potential to “solve” environmental problems even as AI Centers require godawful amounts of energy with negative environmental consequences. We will always have problems despite AI enthusiasts and their claims for utopia.

Let’s return to Einstein’s point and staying with problems: “Stay with it!” This is the encouragement from parent to child, teacher to student, and therapist to client. In all three domains growth often comes by staying with challenges and learning from that (sometimes) nettling process. Learning requires exertion and effort, qualities essential to knowledge acquisition honed over tens of thousands of years. Back to offloading.  It forecloses opportunities for growth and learning in exchange for quick and easy answers that present a compelling illusion: that artificial intelligence is our own intelligence. We feel smart and competent. But ironically, emerging research shows diminished intellectual abilities with AI, particularly a loss of critical thinking…a world feeling smarter, even as it is getting dumber.

An added and unfortunate twist: cognitive surrender. Arguably more insidious than intentional offloading, we surrender without quite knowing it. We give up our intuitive and deliberative capacities as we adopt AI information. No questions asked. One research study found that people followed wrong AI answers 80% of the time. Unlike the decision to offload, surrender means giving up and giving in–not to our own brainpower but to that of a “machine”. Surrender, as in we lose.

There is something called the automation bias that applies here. We tend to believe machine-generated answers more than information from traditional sources like books or (wise) people. The EdTech revolution of the last four decades saturated classrooms with computers and tablets. And with smart phones on a desk, in a pocket, or a purse. Research shows that just the proximity of a smart phone reduces concentration! Many attribute student achievement declines to these technologies…and to social media (a story for another day). Artificial Intelligence is the latest and greatest tech-threat to our own intelligence. The disruptions to education are already immense. Students are using ChatGPT and similar technologies to write essays, term papers, and complete online exams. They are not learning course subject matter, so-called “learning objectives”, and they are (rapidly) forgetting how to think.

Of course, that means that schools themselves must be at the forefront of caution and regulation, right? Nope. Ohio State University will require an entire course and numerous workshops on the use of AI for its students. California State University has contracted with Open-AI for something ominously called ChatGPT Edu…an oxymoron of sorts. This provides over 450,000 students and 63,000 staffers with a premium version of the platform. For those of us who can remember the aforementioned EdTech Revolution, Apple computer school discounts and giveaways in the 1980’s, this is true déjà vu…the nightmarish kind. Not to be outdone, California Community Colleges will support “human-centered AI grounded in equity, accountability, and student success with faculty, staff, administrators, students, and partners to expand access”. How do we reconcile these lofty sentiments with the deep darkside of offloading and surrender? Cynics ponder how this industry, with billions invested, seems to exert such influence over our colleges and universities.

Some argue for a moratorium on these regressive steps by school administrations. In the style of best practice research, there should be a review of the scientific literature that has already exposed scores of problems and flaws with this technology in educational settings. There should be open and honest meetings with stakeholders-more researchers and especially students and teachers; fewer administrators and industry “experts”.

All of education should pause. No more AI implementation. We need to stay with this problem a little longer.