What really strikes me is how rapidly AI is being deployed — with little consistency and an overwhelming push to move forward, ready or not.
In several of my roles, I worked closely with IT and was also responsible for both legacy and modern process control systems. In each of those areas, change control was critical. Before implementing anything new, it was thoroughly tested. And if something went wrong, we had a clear rollback plan. With software, that kind of disciplined approach is not only possible — it’s expected.
But in the case of AI in education, that kind of structure seems completely absent. Every new update brings "improvements" — not on an annual cycle like a new iPhone, but sometimes week to week. And when AI misfires or produces something problematic, the tendency is to dive into it further rather than pause. Just recently, there was an example of Grok doing exactly that.
So with this kind of backdrop, what exactly is the value being added? What are the learning objectives? How is AI being integrated into the curriculum?
The checklist for parents you shared is fantastic — copy, paste, send it to the school and demand answers. Because if AI adoption were happening within a stable system, those answers would already exist — posted on government or school board websites. But they don’t. Because AI is evolving every day.
To me, education should be pushing back. Slow down. Let’s say: “This year, we’re adopting A, B, and C.” Then we evaluate. We see how the transition goes. And if it works, we look at D, E, and F next year.
Think about how educational programs have traditionally worked — structured lesson plans, committee reviews, scheduled rollouts, incremental changes based on continuous improvement. This? This feels like chaos.
Students won’t know the boundaries. Teachers might not either. But everyone seems to be pushing for more, faster.
Your piece does a wonderful job of exploring the public's sentiment, where the federal and state and local boards are at. Your giving parents the key insights they need. Well researched, well presented, well done!
Thank you for taking the time to read this, Kevin!!
That example of what happened when you work with IT is a great contrast to what we are seeing now with genAI and its adoption in education.
I realize this piece is probably too long. But it’s important to be thorough when responding to this unnecessary push for faster adoption in the classroom.
What a comprehensive review, Dhani.
What really strikes me is how rapidly AI is being deployed — with little consistency and an overwhelming push to move forward, ready or not.
In several of my roles, I worked closely with IT and was also responsible for both legacy and modern process control systems. In each of those areas, change control was critical. Before implementing anything new, it was thoroughly tested. And if something went wrong, we had a clear rollback plan. With software, that kind of disciplined approach is not only possible — it’s expected.
But in the case of AI in education, that kind of structure seems completely absent. Every new update brings "improvements" — not on an annual cycle like a new iPhone, but sometimes week to week. And when AI misfires or produces something problematic, the tendency is to dive into it further rather than pause. Just recently, there was an example of Grok doing exactly that.
So with this kind of backdrop, what exactly is the value being added? What are the learning objectives? How is AI being integrated into the curriculum?
The checklist for parents you shared is fantastic — copy, paste, send it to the school and demand answers. Because if AI adoption were happening within a stable system, those answers would already exist — posted on government or school board websites. But they don’t. Because AI is evolving every day.
To me, education should be pushing back. Slow down. Let’s say: “This year, we’re adopting A, B, and C.” Then we evaluate. We see how the transition goes. And if it works, we look at D, E, and F next year.
Think about how educational programs have traditionally worked — structured lesson plans, committee reviews, scheduled rollouts, incremental changes based on continuous improvement. This? This feels like chaos.
Students won’t know the boundaries. Teachers might not either. But everyone seems to be pushing for more, faster.
Your piece does a wonderful job of exploring the public's sentiment, where the federal and state and local boards are at. Your giving parents the key insights they need. Well researched, well presented, well done!
Thank you for taking the time to read this, Kevin!!
That example of what happened when you work with IT is a great contrast to what we are seeing now with genAI and its adoption in education.
I realize this piece is probably too long. But it’s important to be thorough when responding to this unnecessary push for faster adoption in the classroom.