A private school in London is opening the UK’s first classroom taught by artificial intelligence instead of human teachers. They say the technology allows for precise, bespoke learning while critics argue AI teaching will lead to a “soulless, bleak future”.

The UK’s first “teacherless” GCSE class, using artificial intelligence instead of human teachers, is about to start lessons.

David Game College, a private school in London, opens its new teacherless course for 20 GCSE students in September.

The students will learn using a mixture of artificial intelligence platforms on their computers and virtual reality headsets.

    • Deceptichum
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      55
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      I wonder if they’ll be able to sue for damages in the future? This is clearly a fucking idiotic idea that anyone with even the most basic understanding of AI would be able to tell you, so there’s no excuses like ‘Oh who could’ve forseen a generation of children raised on completely fake information could be so poorly led’ in 15 years time.

        • where_am_i@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          3 months ago

          You think that exists in the UK? I doubt. You definitely don’t get anything of that sort in the EU. A law is a law.

  • TheTechnician27@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    72
    ·
    3 months ago

    The students will learn using a mixture of artificial intelligence platforms on their computers and virtual reality headsets.

    Suspicions immediately confirmed that the principal is a complete fucking dipshit who just wants to chase whatever trends sound futuristic. What an awful person for putting kids through this garbage.

    • Chozo@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      3 months ago

      What an awful person for putting kids through this garbage.

      I wouldn’t blame the principal, I’d blame the parents. This is a private school, they’re making a conscientious choice to enroll their kid there.

      • TheTechnician27@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        3 months ago

        I blame both, much in the same way that I’d blame a quack doctor and parents bringing their kids to the quack doctor.

      • unconfirmedsourcesDOTgov@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 months ago

        Not to mention they’re probably paying double for it - once through their taxes for the public school the kids aren’t attending plus the tuition for the private school.

  • StarLight@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    52
    ·
    3 months ago

    Won’t work. I give this little publicity stunt about a week before they go back to human teachers

  • Lvxferre@mander.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    42
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    This is bad on three levels. Don’t use AI:

    1. to output info, decisions or advice where nobody will check its output. Will anyone actually check if the AI is accurate at identifying why the kids aren’t learning? (No; it’s a teacherless class.)
    2. use AI where its outcome might have a strong impact on human lives. Dunno about you guys, but teens education looks kind like a big deal. /s
    3. where nobody will take responsibility for it. “I did nothing, the AI did it, not my fault”. School environment is all about that blaming someone else, now something else.

    In addition to that I dug some info on the school. By comparing this map with this one, it seems to me that the target students of the school are people from one of the poorest areas of London, the Tower Hamlets borough. “Yay”, using poor people as guinea pigs /s

    • *Tagger*@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      28
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      It’s a private school though, so I’d be cautious about assuming they’re poor kids.

      Edit: Yeah, it costs £27000!!!

      • Lvxferre@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        3 months ago

        Fair - my conclusion in this regard was incorrect then.

        They’re still using children as guinea pigs though.

      • progandy@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        The experimental AI programme is more expensive than the traditional course? What are they thinking?

  • JigglySackles@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    31
    ·
    3 months ago

    That’s stupid as hell. They think a bunch of kids are just going to sit there and listen to a robot? They don’t expect them to take advantage of every flaw in AI? Not only that but it removes the human interaction element of development. And to just top it off, AI is so basal right now that it will most likely teach students erroneous information anyways. Why are so many influential people with money complete morons?

    • Karyoplasma@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      3 months ago

      It’s not that they’re morons, it’s that they don’t care shit about others or the future of others. And that’s why they are rich, intellect plays only a very little part in that equation.

  • Chaotic Entropy@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    28
    ·
    3 months ago

    Imagine paying to send your child to private school and then they decide to pull this bullshit. Classic profit motivations.

  • CheeseNoodle@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    26
    ·
    3 months ago

    I bet those kids can’t wait to learn about how issac newton invented the colour yellow when seeing an apple fall from a lemon tree hitting a cow and thus causing him to invent gravity which trapped photons from venus allowing humans to finally have the technology to grow pineapples in canada.

  • gencha@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    ·
    3 months ago

    Marketing play to grab the money off of rich parents. There are still teachers, they are just proxied by “AI”. And there will also still be teachers monitoring. And there will still be teachers for certain topics.

    So it’s teacherless, but with plenty of teachers.

    • wabafee@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      It potentially could, even better if it’s still supervised by an actual teacher but each children would have their own AI, so teaching subjects could be personalized. This could mean slow students can still catch up and have bigger chance understanding the said subjects.

      • overload@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 months ago

        If the AI doesn’t hallucinate incorrect information, I totally agree.

        One size fits all classroom learning leaves many students behind, and having a personal AI tutor could really help kids fill in the gaps in their understanding that would otherwise be overlooked.

        AI hallucinations is still a very real factor that limits the usefulness of this tech right now though. I magine coming into class and your tutor you had yesterday is confidently telling you the opposite of the fact that it taught you yesterday.

    • iopq@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      3 months ago

      It could. For example, I learn better by myself than in a classroom setting.

  • Grimy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    I’m very pro ai but this is a terrible idea.

    Ignoring the fact that the tech is simply not there for this, how would an AI control the class? They will need a glorified baby sitter there at all times that could be simply teaching.

    But I think the worst part of this is that certain kids still need individual attention even if they aren’t special needs and there is no way the AI will be able to pick up on that or act on it.

    Recipe for disaster. The part about vr headsets is just icing on the cake.

    • explore_broaden@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      3 months ago

      To be fair the glorified babysitter wouldn’t require 4+ years of education on educating children, so they probably couldn’t just be “simply teaching.” This is still an awful idea, they seem to be trying to save money by paying a glorified babysitter a lower wage than a teacher. Private schools can be for profit in some place, I wonder if that applies here.

    • Chozo@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      3 months ago

      But I think the worst part of this is that certain kids still need individual attention even if they aren’t special needs and there is no way the AI will be able to pick up on that or act on it.

      Teachers already miss special needs students all the time. If anything, an AI’s pattern recognition will likely be more able to detect areas a student struggles in, because it can analyze a student’s individual performance in a sandbox. Teachers have dozens of students to keep track of at any given time, and it’s impossible for them to catch everything because we feeble humans have limited mental/emotional bandwidth, unlike our perfect silicon gods.

      The truth is that this will actually do a lot of things better than real teachers. It’ll also do a lot of things worse. It’ll be interesting to see how the trade-off plays out and to see which elements of the project are successful enough to incorporate into traditional learning environments.

      • Grimy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        You make a fair point and a tool made specifically for this would probably be a real boon for teachers, but I doubt they incorporated it into their system.

        I’m imagining something slapped together. Basically just an AI voice assistant rewording course material and able to receive voice inputs from students if they have questions. I doubt they even implemented voice recognition to differentiate between students.

        Edit: I’m imagining it wrong, every student gets his own AI.

        That said time will tell and if it shows a bit of promise, it will probably be useful for homework help and what not in the near future. It just seems early to be throwing it in a class. At least, it isn’t a public school where parents wouldn’t have a choice.

        • Chozo@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          3 months ago

          For what it’s worth, most AI tools being used in corporate environments aren’t generative AI like ChatGPT or Stable Diffusion. I very much doubt it will create new material, as much as control how the pre-written material is given to the students.

          I went to a charter high school as a kid, and all our classes were done on computers. The teacher was in the room if you had questions that the software couldn’t answer, but otherwise everything was completely self-paced. I imagine the AI being used in this school is going to be similar, where all the materials are already vetted, and the algorithm determines how and when a student proceeds through the class. The article refers to the classrooms having “learning coaches”, who seem to serve the same purpose the teachers in my school did, as well.

          • Specal@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            3 months ago

            It’s quite funny reading these threads and it’s full of the same technophobia. I wish I had the opportunity to have a specialised tool to help me learning when I was in highschool. I’ve gone back to university and there’s so many tools available now it’s amazing

      • merde alors@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        3 months ago

        Teachers have dozens of students to keep track of at any given time, and it’s impossible for them to catch everything because we feeble humans have limited mental/emotional bandwidth, unlike our perfect silicon gods.

        for teachers with only some years of experience it’s easy to see through a classroom and the information about special needs (or even those not so special needs) are passed from one teacher to another.

        They are not a black box of questionable information. They work together, often with love as the basis of their work.

        Schools aren’t just about digesting information.

    • JackGreenEarth@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      3 months ago

      The whole point is that the AI would give them the individualised attention that a single teacher doesn’t have the time or concentration for. And yes, I think they said there would be a glorified babysitter in the classroom to help with the physical, rather than teaching, aspects.

      • Grimy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        3 months ago

        I read the article a bit to fast, you are completely right.

        For anyone wondering, here is the relevant bit:

        The platforms learn what the student excels in and what they need more help with, and then adapt their lesson plans for the term.

        Strong topics are moved to the end of term so they can be revised, while weak topics will be tackled more immediately, and each student’s lesson plan is bespoke to them.

  • KellysNokia@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    3 months ago

    I’m sorry, but as an AI language model, I cannot allow you to go to the bathroom during classroom hours.

  • Ilandar@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    3 months ago

    The platforms learn what the student excels in and what they need more help with, and then adapt their lesson plans for the term.

    Strong topics are moved to the end of term so they can be revised, while weak topics will be tackled more immediately, and each student’s lesson plan is bespoke to them.

    The students are not just left to fend for themselves in the classroom; three “learning coaches” will be present to monitor behaviour and give support.

    They will also teach the subjects AI currently struggles with, like art and sex education.

    It doesn’t sound quite as dystopian as the headline but I still think we are way too early in the development of this technology to be deploying it at this scale in education.

    • scratchee@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      3 months ago

      Yeah, it sounds like a normal lesson plan with ai fairy dust sprinkled on top as a marketing gimmick.