“I believe writing, music, and art generated by artificial intelligence is not real art, and only humans can do this,” writes Mara Minkey in the student newspaper at Stephen Decatur High School in Berlin, Maryland.
Sure, “AI-generated images are honestly good and sometimes even impressive. Open AI’s Sora is creating mind-blowing realistic videos,” she adds. But, “if an AI were conscious and had experiences and perception and created art on its own, then that would be considered art. But AI can’t work on its own. It still needs human guidance.”
AI has found a home in schools, though. Educators gathered yesterday for a summit in St Cloud, Minnesota, on modifying curricula to account for AI and better prepare students for the world of tomorrow, The Star-Tribune reports.
Educators are successfully using AI—generative AI in particular—for personalized learning, administrative support, and data analytics. It enhances learning experiences by tailoring learning paths, providing immediate feedback for students, and improving accessibility and inclusivity through assistive and adaptive technologies and language translation—just a few ways AI boosts efficiency and supports educators by automating routine tasks and improving data management, according to a report in today’s edition of eSchool News.
This brings me back to Mara’s point: Whether you consider AI creative or just a human-assisted tool doesn’t matter. It liberates educators from some of the data analysis, individual lesson planning and development, and mundane administrative tasks. It empowers teachers to devote more time to nurturing their creativity, thereby enhancing the quality of education they provide to their students.
Whether you embrace the opportunities AI presents or reject them, educators who aren’t ready to incorporate AI will soon find themselves replaced by those who are.
Why wouldn’t a graphic artist, for instance, utilize generative AI to incorporate a red apple into an image? In the future, graphic artists’ work will shift toward their art’s creativity, such as choosing between an apple or an orange, a red apple or a green apple, and so on. The basic rendering will become secondary, as Mara suggests:
“When cameras were first invented, some feared it would make painting obsolete,” she writes, “but it sparked new art movements that went against photorealism, like cubism and impressionism.”
What instructional techniques, learning aids, and new paths to literacy will become humans’ new cubism, our new impressionism, now that AI can remove the boring, routine stuff from our way?
