Better Internet for Kids

The majority of teachers – as many as 81 per cent – are concerned that young people using generative artificial intelligence will become addicted to it. Among the risks, educators mentioned the lack of critical thinking skills, superficialisation of knowledge, and deterioration of relationships between students. However, there are also benefits, such as saving time doing tasks, increased creativity, and the automation of routine tasks.  

These are the findings of qualitative and quantitative studies conducted among Polish teachers at primary school grades 4-8. The conclusions are presented in the NASK report* “Generative artificial intelligence in a Polish school. Paving the way”, under the scientific editorship of Prof. Jacek Pyżalski.

Interest in the use of generative AI in education is slowly increasing. However, teachers’ concerns remain the biggest barrier. The changes brought about by the advent of generative AI are provoking resistance: many educators fear that this technology may lead to a radical transformation of their work, for which they are not adequately prepared. 

As noted by one of the respondents, the very concept of “artificial intelligence” elicits concern and caution: “I prefer natural intelligence”. 

Concerns and risks of using AI 

The concerns often stem from a lack of sufficient knowledge of the possibilities offered by AI-based tools. The teachers often reported that they were afraid of losing control over the teaching process, not knowing how to use new technologies effectively and safely. 

Among the key difficulties, they identified:

• lack of time to learn new tools and implement them in school practice;
• low digital competence of staff;
• resistance to change and fear of losing control over the teaching process;
• lack of clear guidelines and regulations on using generative AI in education;
• inferior performance of AI tools in Polish, and perpetuating gender stereotypes.

The respondents repetitively mentioned the fear of technology replacing essential elements of “school spirit”: relationships, emotions, and communication. The teachers stressed that AI would be no substitute for a joint project, a conversation at break time, or a conflict resolution between students.

The reflections of one teacher illustrate this as follows: 

(…) there has to be this other person, when we do a project together, when we have a discussion; these mirror neurons have to work, someone there smiled at my argument, someone there didn’t smile; these are no longer facts, these are opinions, and these are things we should do with people. The relational issue, that ChatGPT won’t organise a trip for them; ChatGPT won’t take them out for a night at school, ChatGPT won’t meet them at break to chat, ChatGPT won’t help them work through the situation where they are blaming themselves with something and won’t resolve the conflict between them (…) 

Further, teachers are concerned that students will use generative AI to write their homework without properly indicating that they have been assisted by artificial intelligence. This, in turn, can undermine students’ abilities to think critically and lead to the lack of self-reliance.  

The risks as identified by the teachers also included abuses, such as the use of AI for cyberbullying (3 per cent: many times, 11 per cent: once or few times). 

Benefits of using AI 

Despite the perceived concerns and risks, teachers also mention benefits of using AI. The main motivation for applying generative AI in education was most often the desire to save time, especially when it comes to preparing teaching materials, writing reports, and corresponding with parents. 64 per cent of the respondents identified automation of routine tasks as a key advantage. Among other things, the teachers used ChatGPT to generate presentations, lesson plans and tests, as well as to consult it about difficult educational situations and to write polite messages. 

GAI also supported the personalisation of teaching, with 28 per cent of the teachers using AI to work with students with diverse learning needs, including neuroatypical students and those from other countries, for example Ukraine.

Students used AI independently to translate texts, do homework, and produce creative content. The teachers emphasised that AI introduced an element of interactivity, fun, and engagement to lessons, which often motivated young people.  

At the same time, the teachers showed students that it was always important to verify content generated by AI. This was demonstrated during weekly form classes by deliberately asking ChatGPT questions that it answered incorrectly. In this way, students found out that what AI prompted them was not always the truth.

An interesting example is using ChatGPT like an independent consultant on certain issues. During a lesson on AI, one student took out his phone, which was not allowed. How did the teacher behave? The report quotes him as saying:

“and then I started to determine with ChatGPT what we should do in this situation. ChatGPT did great in answering, saying that you have to refer to the rules, to the regulations that we established, but I also asked ChatGPT if that student should be punished somehow… Then we went a step further because the students inspired me to ask ChatGPT if it could be corporal punishment. ChatGPT absolutely ruled out that possibility and gave twenty reasons why not, and they were very smart arguments.”  

Need for new regulations 

While the development of generative AI is opening up new opportunities for education, a number of challenges are being faced in its implementation in schools. The teachers reported the need to strengthen their digital competences and the technical capacities of schools.  

However, the main dilemma remains the ethical issue, namely the disruption of relationships between students and teachers, as well as a kind of “detachment” of young people from real emotions, values, and knowledge.

As Prof. Pyżalski emphasises in the report: 

“Since communication is the fuel for our relationships, using generative AI tools in this way brings with it many ethical challenges and consequences for the quality of interpersonal relationships. This impact is difficult to predict at our current stage of knowledge. What has become apparent is that, while this type of use is technically possible, perhaps the right decision would be to limit the use of GAI tools in this particular area. There is no doubt that these issues require special attention and reflection, not least in the context of training teachers to use AI tools in their work”. 

The full report (in EN) is available for download on this page. 

*NASK is a national research institute where activities related to ensuring internet security are carried out, along with research and development work aimed at enhancing cybersecurity and the reliability of network systems. NASK is the coordinator of the Polish Safer Internet Centre, run together with the Empowering Children Foundation. NASK hosts the Dyżurnet.pl hotline, which receives reports about illegal content on the internet, mainly related to child sexual abuse material. 

Find more information about the work of the Polish Safer Internet Centre, including its awareness raising, helpline, hotline, and youth participation services, or find similar information for other Safer Internet Centres throughout Europe.