Back to News
Advertisement
Advertisement

⚡ Community Insights

Discussion Sentiment

67% Positive

Analyzed from 2408 words in the discussion.

Trending Topics

#kids#school#schools#using#learn#don#need#teachers#learning#students

Discussion (67 Comments)Read Original on HackerNews

spking•about 1 hour ago
legitster•about 1 hour ago
Even if you're pro-AI, there's a reason calculators are banned from math classes until a certain point. It seems like a no-brainer to have people learn on hammers before moving them to nailguns.

I can't help but think of this Chesterton Quote:

"It is, on the contrary, a thing analogous to writing one's own love-letters or blowing one's own nose. These things we want a man to do for himself, even if he does them badly. I am not here arguing the truth of any of these conceptions; I know that some moderns are asking to have their wives chosen by scientists, and they may soon be asking, for all I know, to have their noses blown by nurses."

hombre_fatal•42 minutes ago
I can’t imagine how many shortcuts I would have taken as a kid/teen or stressed uni student if AI were an option.

I can see even a well-meaning student stuck in this aspirational cycle of “I’ll do it myself next time, but right now I just want to catch up.”

bugbull•34 minutes ago
There were certainly integral solving validators online when I took calculus in high school. At some point I gave up and just used that, because “the money is in web application development, I don’t need that calculus stuff”.

Big regret.

donatj•12 minutes ago
In 2004 I had a program on my TI-89 "Calculus Made Easy". It would do basically everything AND show your work.

Someone gave it to me about 2/3's of the way through Calc 1. I truly regret having become dependent on it. I studied enough to know roughly what I was doing but not enough to not be dependent.

I suspect learning with AI is the same sort of thing. You're learning, but you're not deep learning .

SoftTalker•32 minutes ago
I have never needed calculus since leaving university, nearly 40 year ago. If you're not in hard engineering, you probably won't (and if you are, you'll get to use all the computer assisting tools you want).
all2•34 minutes ago
This definitely would have been me.

I burned 100s of hours into my 400 level classes, some of those hours were completely wasted on things that I could never figure out how to get them to work.

pj_mukh•9 minutes ago
Just so we're clear, phones were already banned in classrooms. "Personal" use of AI within a classroom to help someone like a personal calculator or a personal "cheating aid" was already banned.

This bans it from all teaching tools and materials as well.

tw04•6 minutes ago
Good? The amount of just flat out wrong information the average LLM spits out makes it unfit for education IMO. I can’t imagine asking teachers to have to personally vet every single lesson plan to ensure an AI wasn’t hallucinating when producing the content.
lukeschlather•1 minute ago
Frontier LLMs with Internet search are different beasts than what you're describing as an average LLM. In 5 years I don't think you're going to be able to get away from LLMs if you care about correctness, and we're already to the point where if a calculation matters I want an LLM to check my math.
pj_mukh•2 minutes ago
If they were using a two year old gpt-4o type model, I'd agree.

There's good teachers and bad teachers, there's good AI implementations and bad ones. This bans all of them.

I'm not particularly worried, meaningful experimentation will continue in private schools. I just hope public schools can learn from that and open it back up when it's mature.

Avicebron•40 minutes ago
It's also not banning parents from using AI with their kids or showing their kids AI outside of school so I don't know the issue. Does anyone here actually have kids in school and can report on what kind of "AI" these kids are using, because I can almost guarantee they would be using it as a glorified wikipedia at the absolute top end. They aren't going to be doing the kind of stuff people on here are using it for..
charcircuit•40 minutes ago
It's like banning teachers or textbooks from school. LLMs are the single greatest learning technology ever created.
Zetaphor•30 minutes ago
Saying that a human teacher is equivalent to an LLM is derogatory to the teachers and exaggerating the capabilities of the LLM. I say this as someone who uses these things daily in my work and personal life. Let's not murky the waters with complete falsehoods
charcircuit•17 minutes ago
LLMs have been better than many teachers I've had in my life. To no fault of the teachers, it's hard to compete with something that has understanding of every subject, is hooked up to the internet, and is given 1:1 time with the person learning at any time of the day, answering promptly.
anon7000•37 minutes ago
If kids use them for learning and not just cheating. You have to learn how to learn and how to think for yourself before you can do that
charcircuit•22 minutes ago
LLMs can teach you that too. You do not need to learn that first.
mushi_shi•37 minutes ago
Are you sure that taking shortcuts to information isn't potentially doing more damage to learning?
baby_souffle•23 minutes ago
Being able to access information faster is not really a problem. I don't know anybody that was super upset that the encyclopedia came on a bunch of CD roms instead of bound volumes.

Not having the skills to assess the accuracy / validity of the information you accessed at breakneck speed however is going to be the downfall of us all.

Ai just made it easier to generate misinformation faster. We were already suffering from the blight of misinformation spreading through various media channels.

If AI can be used to better teach effective media and information literacy, we should be rolling that out in schools.

But it sounds like AI in public schools is largely just being used for speed running homework.

jansport123•37 minutes ago
technology seems to bifurcate outcomes - the top students seem to get much better than previous cohorts but the rest of them seem to get a lot worse.
charcircuit•15 minutes ago
I don't want the government to be forcing people into the worse outcome just to make outcomes more equal.
rps93•42 minutes ago
Im for this as I use AI in my current college classes to learn things quickly. Also, save money aka not have to buy/read the textbook.

Using AI allows me to take and feed my notes to it and have it create multiple choice quizzes. Same for assignments where my teacher asks us to define terms. So far doing this I am able to retain things quickly and speak intelligently during the next class.

So dont read the textbook, just learn what is needed and graduate. Mandami is definitely right on this as my new way of learning will get me A(s) and B(s) but im thinking i will miss a lot of important pieces of information.

iLoveOncall•22 minutes ago
You're literally stealing from yourself by paying for tuition and not getting any benefit from it besides a piece of paper that won't hold to scrutiny once someone asks you to code something on an interview or in a company.

Intern quality at my FAANG has been dreadful for the past year, and new grads aren't much better. Most don't pass probation nowadays.

adolfojp•17 minutes ago
I figure this is quickly becoming an either use steroids for bodybuilding competitions even if you're against them or opt out of competing kind of situation.
voxl•31 minutes ago
So you'd rather give money to the company that stole the copyrighted material of experts and academics instead of giving them money? Sure some textbooks are corporate greed schemes themselves, but many others are just the work of a group of professors
Sebguer•22 minutes ago
they literally said that they think Mamdani is doing the right thing and that they understand they're hindering their education by using AI the way they are, did you even read the comment before making your response?
taybin•about 1 hour ago
Good. Kids need to learn how to think before letting other stuff do it for them.
MisterKent•about 2 hours ago
Good. The more I use AI the more I feel like it will drag humanity into a local maxima that we'll never be able to escape from.
pj_mukh•40 minutes ago
The dirty secret on NYC schools is that the upper-middle class tends to send their kids to private schools unless they can get their kids into some gifted/talented public schools. The real experimentation on what tools will and will not work is happening there under the watchful eye of wealthy hyper-involved (see: comfy jobs w/ adequate spare time) parents.

I don't know what level of digital tools is best for which types of kids, but the public school system would be prudent in adopting the learnings from the private school system and making sure the best education isn't just available to the rich. The current mayor is mad-effective at his job but does have a habit of doing the ol' wink-wink nod-nod to keep his base happy. This (along with a pointless Waymo ban) sounds like one of those actions.

jansport123•36 minutes ago
bigger reason to ban AI in public schools then. AI + neglectful parents is a disaster in the making.
pj_mukh•11 minutes ago
Yes that would work out well if by this ban we could also properly fund schools to create enough teaching staff. But you and I both know that's not happening.

So on the off-chance one of these tools (that even used AI in the background) could create a tool that actually worked well for, say, gifted public schools kids that don't need as much one-on-one attention, they could free up limited human teacher hours to give weaker kids more attention, that is no longer a possibility.

That possibility, only remains for private school kids, who don't even need it in the first place.

amclennon•about 1 hour ago
Makes sense. I had to learn how to add / subtract before I could use a calculator. Note: This policy doesn't seem to apply to high school
MattDamonSpace•about 1 hour ago
Seems premature but then again humans are always a bit skiddish around change

Still, not shocking that the DSA stronghold that elected someone like Mamdani is going to be passionate against AI.

Will be interesting to watch outcomes diverge over the next few years. If you’re gonna ban stuff, do it at local levels like this so we can see differences play out across many locations/districts.

oldsklgdfth•about 1 hour ago
You bring up politics when this topic is about technology adoption in education.

Grew up in Greece and was shocked that calculators are used in high school math.

An interesting note: "And teachers will not be able to ask A.I. to grade assignments." This prevents teachers from using it as well, which is an interesting angle.

summermusic•about 1 hour ago
I can see the 2040 study already: “Schoolchildren who did not use AI in primary school show higher outcomes”
broodbucket•32 minutes ago
kolinko•about 1 hour ago
I’d bet the opposite. There were some poor researches trying to confirm your guess
anonymars•about 1 hour ago
What's your reasoning? Did iPads/Chromebook exposure make younger people better or worse at computers?

Maybe if there are education-tailored AI models strictly limited to explaining and never giving the answer, but even then, how will you know when it's wrong?

tartoran•37 minutes ago
Perhaps when AI is better to just guide the student to slove a problem rather than spell out the answer for them. In that sense an AI tutor that is well designed for this specific task would be infinitely patient and explain in many ways till the student gets it. We're not there yet so I applaud the current ban.
dayyan•about 1 hour ago
I remember a scene in Star Trek, where an AI is used to help teach the little Vulcan kids.
krapp•about 1 hour ago
Star Trek isn't real.
dayyan•19 minutes ago
“Isn’t real” isn’t a rebuttal.

It’s just refusing to think.

wyre•4 minutes ago
It's a rebuttal in the same way that saying the Vulcans in Star Trek use AI in their classrooms. Star Trek is a fictional story in a fictional universe that doesn't have to follow the laws and rules of science, society, reality, etc for the sake of telling a story that fans will want to follow.
ElProlactin•41 minutes ago
It's interesting to see the difference (so far) in comments about banning AI versus banning social media.
jmyeet•36 minutes ago
There's a far deeper and longer standing issue here and that's rent-seeking.

We know what works in education. It's phonics and direct insturction, basically. But nobody gets rich that way so you end up buying into a worse system through two steps:

1. Education PhDs need to justify their existence. They do by reineventing what works. This is basically how we came up with sight words to replace phonics, which is largely responsible for destroying literacy. Whoever comes up with these schemes gets to get academic cachet for being a thought leader. They get invited to all the cool conferences and parties; and

2. Rent-seeking edtech companies end up creating solutions for things that aren't really problems. This long predated AI. It suffers from all the normal issues of corruption in government procurement. Politicians and superintendents are enticed ("bribed") to buy solutions that teachers are then mandated to use, forcing students onto devices to work a program with dubious results.

You see this pattern play out in a ton of government R&D. For example, SMR reactors in nuclear power. There's no world that SMR makes sense. Nuclear plants benefit from scale. But behind all this you'll find a bunch of physics academics who pushed this idea to get status, some of whom then get hired by SMR startups and others get involved in government procurement. Everybody is grfiting.

So while I welcome schools not using AI early on, that's barelly scratching the surface. And that begins with teaching literacy and holding students back until they can read sufficiently for their grade level.

Advertisement
doodlebugging•about 1 hour ago
I agree with other posters that kids need to learn critical thinking skills at an early age. I hope we don't see Texas educators trying to take the opposite side of the coin and mandating AI teachers at all (or any) levels just to try to own some more libs in NYC. This state has enough problems.
petilon•about 1 hour ago
Forget AI, silicon valley parents don't want their kids using phones and computers either.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/us/articles/silicon-valley-parent...

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/08/18/technology/silicon-valley...

sfpotter•about 1 hour ago
*moves back to NYC*
VCFundedGenYer•about 1 hour ago
Good. We need this everywhere.
danbrooks•about 1 hour ago
Seems like a well designed policy. Currently for one year and up to the middle school level.
mupuff1234•about 1 hour ago
But I assume students already aren't allowed to just submit genAI output and afaik most classes don't involve computer use, so what's really the change?
carabiner•about 1 hour ago
Yep, just like the tech elite. Peter Thiel limits his kids to 90 min/week screentime.
WCSTombs•about 1 hour ago
Here's another (non-paywalled) source for this news: https://abcnews.com/Technology/new-york-city-public-schools-...

The ban goes through eighth grade, and in high school apparently there's a specific AI literacy class. It's unclear from the article if that's the only AI in high school or it's just unregulated.

My opinion: it's a good policy and frankly just common sense.

- Students using AI risk offloading their cognition onto the AI and thereby skipping the actual learning process.

- Teachers using AI likewise do a disservice to the students.

In the middle of all that, there may actually be a version of AI that can help people learn without incurring the major downsides, but I've not seen any evidence of that in the current AI systems, to the point that an outright ban in the school setting makes sense. I'm heartened to see more education organizations think similarly [1].

[1]: https://www.law.berkeley.edu/academics/registrar/academic-ru...

ChrisArchitect•about 2 hours ago
Title: New York City Bans A.I. in Elementary and Middle Schools

non-paywall: https://www.nytimes.com/2026/09/01/nyregion/ai-ban-schools-n...

tehjoker•about 1 hour ago
Thank you Mayor Mamdani and the DSA. This is a major win for keeping children from losing their minds, retaining education quality, and promoting socialization.
Advertisement
rmason•about 1 hour ago
This makes about as much sense to me as banning all personal computers in the eighties from schools. You are putting these kids at a decided disadvantage.
dymk•about 1 hour ago
Kids can play on slot machines when they’re older. An 8 year old doesn’t need Claude.
protimewaster•about 1 hour ago
It's limited to "younger students", and keeping younger students away from computers also isn't a bad idea IMO.
hgoel•about 1 hour ago
Keeping younger students away from computers is dumb, but we do need to go back to the basic computer literacy classes of the early/mid 2000s, e.g. typing, basics of desktop operating systems like the filesystem, using word, powerpoint etc. It's appalling how lacking high schoolers seem to be in these kinds of skills.
anonymars•37 minutes ago
I think young exposure to real computers (where you create, and have to figure things out; not consumption machines) provides access to a level of fluency that is otherwise difficult or impossible to achieve, just like many other skills (language, music...)
protimewaster•30 minutes ago
I think that can be done without having them sit in front of a computer or even really using a computer, though. Lots of kids have stories about wandering over to a college campus when they were in middle school, wandering into a room with the keypunch machines, and learning about computers that way. Very few of those kids directly used a computer, but they learned it anyway.
SoftTalker•26 minutes ago
So give your kid an Apple-II or TRS-80 then?
jansport123•33 minutes ago
i wouldn't let my kid use a phone or a computer till a certain age. age 1 - 11 is about having strong foundations in basics and these basics haven't really changed in a couple of decades at least. Reading, critical thinking, math etc... all don't need computers to a certain age. I say this as someone who got on a pc at age 10 and have made a living off being interested in computers.
GlacierFox•about 1 hour ago
The current state of AI isn't remotely anything like having a personal computer as a young kid in the 80's. What the F are you talking about? How do those two things even remotely correlate?

This AI zealotry on here is getting unhinged. Young kids need to learn to think, comprehend and reason without some AI doing it for them. You depress me with your backward takes.

kolinko•about 1 hour ago
Current chatbots are better tutors than an average school teacher imho.

Not saying that we should replace ones with the other ones, but I’d say from age 11-12 and up kids should be taught how to use AI well.

nekiwo•about 1 hour ago
Communicating with adults and handling the friction of conversing with others is a skill students need to gain, especially at this age. Talking to a machine that will always suit your style of talking isn't always good.
azuanrb•about 1 hour ago
Sure, if the kids want to learn. But let’s be honest, most of them, or even us, are just going to use the chatbot directly for the answer.
lazzlazzlazz•19 minutes ago
There's nearly zero AI zealotry on here. As of the time of my posting, almost every comment here on Hacker News is both supportive of the measure and largely against AI. This is now a neo-Luddite messaging board.