"Human, All too Human": Reflecting on utilizing AI for engaging classroom critical discussions

(Photo by Kenny Eliason)

Can AI be an authentic collaborator in fostering classroom critical discussions?

The use of perspective taking in studying critical incidents has served as a tool to investigate the manifestation of systematic inequity in everyday classrooms. Students engage in reflection and reimagine their responses to various situations, while aiming to understand how such inequity unfolds. However, the extent to which AI can represent and participate in perspective taking remains elusive. Exploring diverse perspectives and fostering deep discussions and reflections with the help of AI raises questions about its ability to establish personhood and hence provide “authentic” viewpoints.

Encouraging students to think outside the box and critically evaluate alternatives has proven to be a daunting task due to our societal conditioning. Our thinking often aligns with dominant thoughts or societal norms, inhibiting genuine exploration of diverse perspectives. Power dynamics further complicate matters, particularly in the classroom, where students may feel compelled to conform to expectations and cater their responses to appease teachers. This may limit the authenticity of classroom discussions, reducing them to mere intellectual gymnastics rather than genuine dialogues. The presence of a teacher often reinforces the institutional gaze, further influencing students' responses. Striving for intellectual honesty and engaging in meaningful conversations remains an ongoing struggle in every teacher’s attempts to foster critical discussions.

In the following, I share a classroom activity implemented in my undergraduate sociolinguistic course, aimed at facilitating justice-oriented discussions. My objectives were twofold: first, to put into practice the concept of "rightful presence" as advocated by Angela Calabrese Barton and Edna Tan in their article titled "Beyond Equity as Inclusion: A Framework of 'Rightful Presence' for Guiding Justice-Oriented Studies in Teaching and Learning," and second, to explore the role of AI in providing alternative perspectives. Specifically, I wanted to examine who AI represents and whether it can offer an impartial and objective standpoint that stimulates discourse.

To begin, we discussed Barton and Tan's article, which presents a framework of "rightful presence". This framework challenges the traditional 'sanctuary' view of classrooms, where students are seen as guests and teachers/schools act as hosts. By giving students the right to co-author the agenda, we increase the likelihood of disrupting the dynamics of the classroom and fostering an inclusive environment conducive to authentic discussions.

Next, we analyzed the following scenario from the above mentioned article: 'During the last session, students collaborated on a crime scene investigation. Mr. A explained that their task was to gather and analyze data to identify and convict the correct criminal. He emphasized the importance of fairness and using data as evidence. However, Amir interrupted by stating, 'Unless you're Black! If you're Black, you'll be convicted.'

In response to this scenario, the teacher diverted the classroom discussion by suggesting that they can address this topic at another time. This scenario highlights the need to reauthor the classroom space, providing students with affordances to effectively engage in such discourse.

Once I ensured that students grasped the underlying context, I instructed them to engage in an activity aimed at reimagining the above student teacher conversations:

• Write a short play (about 10 minutes) to resolve the ‘conflict’ described in the ‘Only When They Are Black!’ case study provided in the above article.
• You can use Open AI ChatGPT to help you generate/brainstorm ideas, but the ownership and responsibility must be ultimately yours.
• Your story must illustrate what ‘rightful presence’ looks like.
• You will perform your plays through role-playing.

The students recorded their play scripts on Padlet (link: https://padlet.com/cclin2/week-10-rightful-presence-tt1mqbc9b6lm2a5l). Acting out their scripts not only made the activities more fun for the students but also served as a means to externalize their creations, encouraging them to consider the intended audience and the social impact of their work. The presence of an audience made them more aware of the social effects, fostering a sense of social responsibility. Additionally, it allowed them to gain some distance and reflect on their work objectively.

To my surprise, only one out of three groups chose to incorporate AI in their play. At first glance, the group that used AI seemed to approximate the "perfect" answer, as both the teacher and students (in the play) adhered to social decorum and acted “appropriately”. However, in this context, perfection was not the primary goal; instead, it was the collective and diverse range of responses that hold significance.

Personally, I found the AI's response to be overly perfect, simply conforming to what was expected, similar to the scripted responses often encountered in diversity, inclusion, and equity (DIE) training. While the AI represented a perspective, it was a perspective detached from any specific context. It synthesized what the field deemed as the "correct" thing to say. On the surface, it appeared faultless, but it lacked contextual relevance and embodied a decontextualized and disembodied response to the task.

Interestingly, the group that used AI received the most laughter during their performance. This may be attributed to the AI-generated response sounding so perfect and automatic. The fact that the students knew it was created by AI and lacked human interest might have allowed them to laugh about it without any perceived consequences.

It is worth mentioning that out of the 13 students, only two are students of color, although there are heritage speakers among them, representing languages such as Spanish, Arabic, Italian and Yiddish. The group dynamics also play a role in shaping their responses, as subtle power dynamics need to be taken into account.

As humans, we possess inherent flaws that we should accept and embrace. Consequently, we need to recognize that our perspectives are influenced by historical thinking and shaped by social contexts. Our viewpoints are infused with certain particularities, which can be both limiting and invaluable. They offer unique insights and embodied experiences that AI, despite its ability to simulate, cannot possess.

On the other hand, AI may not be as faultless or impartial as it appears. It represents a viewpoint that is often unmarked and seemingly disinterested, aligning itself with the dominant narrative while marginalizing perspectives that deviate from the mainstream discourse. Therefore, it is crucial to empower marginalized perspectives and value their lived experiences, rather than simply adhering to the prevailing consensus.