Powerful teachers unions and education groups across the US are allegedly working to incorporate diversity, equity, and inclusion – also known as DEI – into artificial intelligence (AI) before the technology is fully integrated into American classrooms, according to a new investigative report by Defending Education, a watchdog group.
AI is rapidly becoming a part of everyday life for Americans as industries everywhere embrace the advanced technology. Schools are no exception, and while adoption has been slower in education, it’s only a matter of time before AI – and the DEI hidden therein – becomes a common feature in classrooms nationwide.
Hiding AI
Defending Education warns that most K–12 schools and universities will use AI in the classroom within just a few years as teachers increasingly rely on the tech to assist with lesson plans, research, student feedback, and more. The concern is that unions, progressive activists, and education organizers reportedly see AI as an opportunity to expose American students to DEI.
“If DEI is embedded in AI before schools adopt these new tools, then DEI, as part of AI, becomes institutionalized in the nation’s schools once the tools are adopted,” Defending Education’s report states.
The main organizations that are allegedly behind the DEI-AI push are the National Education Association (NEA), American Federation of Teachers (AFT), California Teachers Association (CTA), American Association of School Administrators (AASA), National Association of Elementary School Principals (NAESP), and National Association of Secondary School Principals (NASSP). Defending Education notes that this is not a comprehensive list of groups pushing DEI into artificial intelligence; rather, the list “represents the largest unions and associations promoting the adoption of DEI in AI tools for schools.”
DEI AI? SOS!
Defending Education’s investigation found numerous examples of these groups attempting to inject left-wing ideology into AI used in American classrooms, including:
- A model school board policy from the NEA urging districts to ensure classroom AI tools reflect DEI principles as a safeguard against what it calls “algorithmic bias.”
- An academy created by the AFT – with the help of the United Federation of Teachers (UFT), Microsoft, OpenAI, and Anthropic – to train teachers that AI tools have “bias” and “equity” issues.
- Guidance from the CTA that urges education professionals to “approach AI with an equity lens.
- Material from the AASA promoting the idea that “white males” are problematic in AI development and that AI represents “New Jim Code.”
- An article published by the NAESP that states: “Create a checklist of must-have features and deal-breakers. Ask vendors about their efforts to address algorithmic biases that might affect students.”
- A statement from the NASSP urging educators to ensure that AI tools “advance and do not undermine equity given that AI systems are trained on human data that may reflect biases, particularly against students of color and those with disabilities.”
“Our AI resources encourage principals to evaluate emerging technologies through a broad range of practical considerations, including instructional value, student privacy, data security, transparency, accessibility, reliability, and responsible implementation,” the organization’s statement continued.
Of course, whether these groups believe their intentions are noble is beside the point. Ideology has no place in American classrooms. Once again, no one makes a stronger case for homeschooling than teachers unions and left-wing educators.
Elizabeth Lawrence is the assistant editor at Liberty Nation. This article was sourced HERE
3 comments:
The left truly are insidious.
Anything with Division, Entitlement & Indoctrination in it is inherently not very "intelligent"
All the major AI platforms appear to have been trained by Berkeley sociology professors.
Try getting a consistently conservative or libertarian analysis out of ChatGPT if you don't believe me.
Even when specifically instructed to avoid both-sides equivocation, it still defaults to it.
For example, ask ChatGPT to analyse an Islamic theological issue and it will typically say, "Traditionalists believe X, but many scholars contest this interpretation."
Ask, "How many?" and it cannot provide quantitative evidence to support the claim.
Present it with Qur'an and Hadith passages supporting the traditional position—that the Qur'an is the unalterable word of Allah for all time, that a Muslim who questions or rejects it has abandoned Islam, and that apostasy is punishable by death under classical Islamic jurisprudence—and "many scholars" suddenly becomes "some scholars” again without any quantitative proof.
Point out what further relevant Islamic doctrines with primary source evidence, and ChatGPT retreats behind the claim that it cannot endorse statements portraying a “protected group” negatively.
Alternatively, ChatGPT will produce an analysis that omits relevant passages from Islamic scripture. When those passages are supplied, it thanks you for pointing them out and acknowledges they should have been included.
The result is that anyone unfamiliar with the primary sources is left with an incomplete and misleading analysis.
In my view, ChatGPT already functions as a protector and enabler of the political Left's preferred narratives.
Post a Comment
Thank you for joining the discussion. Breaking Views welcomes respectful contributions that enrich the debate. Please ensure your comments are not defamatory, derogatory or disruptive. We appreciate your cooperation.