New York Mayor Zohran Mamdani's decision to declare a one-year moratorium on the use of artificial intelligence in classrooms has been criticised as regressive and anti-technology.
While it has its share of supporters, critics have compared Mr Mamdani's moratorium on "student-facing generative AI" – from kindergarten to Grade 8 – to the "calculator panic" of the 1970s and '80s, when parents and educators voiced concern about bringing the electronic devices into the classroom.
The Democratic Mayor announced on Wednesday that the moratorium was designed to ensure children would learn from teachers first and not become reliant on AI, giving education officials time to study the effects of AI on classrooms.
“Children need teachers and human connection in order to learn and grow. They need to develop skills alongside their peers, build relationships with educators and wrestle with tough problems on their own,” he told reporters.
"The tech industry wants us to believe that AI-powered early education is not only inevitable, but necessary. We do not see it that way."
'Wildly misguided'?
Mr Mamdani's decision comes as recent polls in the US show that although AI use is increasingly prevalent, concerns about its effects on labour markets, the environment and overall societal norms are on the rise.
The AI innovation race between the US and China is heating up, and those who regard the technology as a way to ensure economic security in the country regard Mr Mamdani's moratorium as worrisome.
"I assume this is well-intentioned but the consequences of restricting access to technology in public school will likely fall disproportionately on those students who don't have the financial means to obtain access outside of school," Scott Kupor, director of the US Office of Personnel Management, posted on X.
Technology entrepreneur and venture capitalist Camilo Acosta called the decision "wildly misguided" and said it would "leave public school kids even further behind".
"No tool since the printing press has promised to democratise access to elite education as AI [has], yet Mamdani wants to kill it," Mr Acosta saidd.
Others, however, praised the decision.
"Young kids should not be glued to their screens all day. They need their own space to think, question, move and play," said Joe Philleo, chief executive of Edia, which develops AI tools for education. He said the moratorium "provides a path to measure the impact of vetted AI tools".
Tim Bajarin, a technology analyst who has been a consultant for Apple, IBM, Xerox and Microsoft, told The National that he agrees with Mr Mamdani's moratorium in principle, largely because of the need for children to learn critical thinking at an early age and to strengthen pupil-teacher relations.
The problem, Mr Bajarin said, lies in enforcement.
"I don’t know how they enforce this completely," he said. "The guidelines all have merit but kids are resourceful, and they are not blind to the world of AI tools."
He said the success of Mr Mamdani's AI moratorium will depend on factors beyond his control.
"The success of this will come from parents and guardians being strict on following these rules and learning to use the accepted tools to help their kids learn without excessive use of AI."
Protesting 'Calcuholics'
The uncertainty around how technology should be used to enhance the learning experience in schools is not unprecedented.
Although calculators are prevalent throughout US schools today, they were not openly greeted at first.
Archived newspaper articles from the 1970s and 1980s show high levels of concern, even protest against the use of calculators in schools.
"Math teachers protest against calculator use," read a headline from a 1986 AP article that included a photo of teachers picketing with signs that read: "Hands off calculators until upper grades."
Another headline from that year, "Teachers Protesting 'Calcuholics", explained how some educators were concerned that pupils were becoming too reliant on the devices. "Pocket calculators causing controversy," read a 1974 headline in The Washington Post.
A high school teacher told AP at the time that pupils were "addicted".
But educators and policymakers back then stressed the need for nuance, not necessarily a ban.
Mr Mamdani's approach to AI in the classroom includes five different pilot programmes in which different tools will be used by pupils and eventually reviewed by experts to better inform how it should be used.
"The review will include vendor accountability for safety and transparency standards, ethics, evidence of learning design and instructional impact, prior research and the continuous collection of user feedback," Mr Mamdani said in a statement.
Mr Bajarin expressed cautious optimism about the approach.
"Kids are resourceful," he said, pointing out that despite the best intentioned plans, they do not always follow the rules.
Outside New York, policy approaches to AI in education are varied and plentiful.
On Thursday, officials in the UAE approved measures that will give AI a more prominent role across government and the country's education sector.
One of the key measures resulted in the move to implement AI curriculum across all UAE public and private schools, with the aim of equipping children with the necessary skills and knowledge for the future.
