What do AI futures mean for human connection?
The Heart and Soul of Learning
What do AI futures mean for human connection?
This op-ed is part of a series hosted by the AI Observatory, offering perspectives on key issues in AI. We hope you find this opinion piece thought-provoking and encourage further discussion on the topic.
In the concluding remarks of the 2023 UNESCO “Guidance for Generative AI in education and research” paper, they argue that we “need to rethink what exactly should be learned and to what ends”, calling for “revisiting the purpose of education”. Yet, with AI offering (and challenging) ways of how we learn, less focus is being given to what and why we learn.
I respond to this call by reflecting on the purpose of teaching and learning; how human connections are intrinsic to the teaching and learning process; and how inequity can be exacerbated in AI-enhanced education if we don’t focus on holistic education. Drawing on my previous work on injustices in EdTech, I purposefully take a decolonial lens to the questions facing us today. That is to say, equity here is not only understood as equitable access to, and usability of, AI for education. Rather, it tackles the cultural-epistemic injustices brought into the teaching and learning process, as AI increasingly shapes education futures.
What is the purpose of education?
To answer this, I love to draw on the Malaysian philosopher and polymath, Professor Naquib Al-Attas, who states in his book chapter on “The De-Westernisation of Knowledge” that knowledge is seated in the soul, heart and intellect. Educators teach through the soul, heart and intellect, and learners learn through the soul, heart and intellect.
Knowledge for the soul assists in challenging the ego, connecting to a greater purpose beyond oneself, serving others, and developing morals, values, ethics and integrity. Education with/for the soul requires a teacher that can be a living role model, guiding learners in taming the lower self such as anger, egoism, greed, materialism, laziness, jealousy or envy. The teacher should facilitate the learner to a greater purpose beyond themselves. Knowledge for the heart assists in developing compassion, empathy, emotional intelligence and mindfulness. These aspects are used in the teaching process as well as taught to learners. Furthermore, it’s not just about theoretically discussing these concepts, but about improving one’s character through contemplation, love, and lots of practice. Knowledge for the intellect focuses on developing reasoning, understanding, problem-solving, memorising, critical thinking and creative thinking, among others. This is where AI — coupled with human connection — shows the most promise, both in terms of enacting and supporting learners to develop these skills.
Professor Al-Attas goes on to say that “the purpose of seeking knowledge is to inculcate goodness and justice in man.” He emphasises man as an individual self, where each of us should strive for excellence in character and deeds, as well as man as good citizens, responsible for taking care of the world. While there are many scholars who philosophise about the purpose of education, I chose Professor Al-Attas here for his decolonial paradigm that puts heart and soul on equal footing to intellect. In Western discourses, while the heart and soul are acknowledged in educational settings, the intellect is given a higher ranking.
So with this purpose of seeking knowledge, to what extent can AI become an effective holistic pedagogue? Could AI ever teach the soul and the heart in the same way a teacher does? Should we even strive for such a future? Most importantly, when we take this holistic view of education, what potential inequities become evident in increasingly AI-shaped education systems?
Why will human connection continue to be the cornerstone of education?
With many sales pitches on how personalised learning and AI tutors could revolutionise education, centering the role of humans is crucial in achieving holistic education. Here are a few reasons why.
AI lacks embodied cognition
Drawing on the work of Francisco Varela and colleagues, embodied cognition explains that our experiences come from having a body with sensorimotor capacities. These individual sensorimotor capacities are themselves embedded in a more encompassing biological, psychological, cultural and historical context. This connects with my PhD research on MOOCs, where I found that educators create educational experiences that strongly link to who they are, what they value, and how they understand the world. (Adam, 2020). For example, an educator that had a child with a disability was very intentional about access and inclusive education for learners with special needs. Likewise, an African educator was more conscious of race, religion and reaching low-resource settings. To harness the positives, and reduce the negatives that can come from this, embodied educators need to make explicit what their biases and philosophical underpinnings are when they teach. But when disembodied GenAI presents itself as neutral, trustworthy, objective, bias-free, and authoritative, it’s lack of embodied cognition can hinder and harm the learning experience.
AI cannot teach with heart and soul
Pre-modern Islamic pedagogy has different epistemological foundations to present day western education, which helps to unpack AI limitations. The person in the picture* (left) is the late Murabit Al-Hajj, a Mauritanian Islamic Scholar. Teachers and students from around the world would often travel to deep rural parts of Mauritania to study under his guidance. The epistemological foundations in his pedagogy are entirely different, where just silently being in the presence of the teacher, or following them in their daily lives, serves as valuable learning, as one would be blessed by their spiritual presence and learn the minute details of conduct.
The connection between the student and the teacher is the connecting of the heart and soul, not just the mind. The teacher is not merely the source of knowledge nor the facilitator of knowledge, but the embodiment of knowledge. Who the teacher is in character is more valuable than what or how they teach. In fact, when you sit with such a teacher, the book is a secondary source of knowledge, as they are the living source. This may seem far-fetched to you but, if you think back to teachers that left an impact on you, was it those with perfect content knowledge, or those that served as role models and guided you? AI cannot achieve this genuine pedagogy of care.
Human connections risk being commodified
Given the above arguments, many will agree with me that AI cannot do everything a human teacher can, as education is fundamentally a social process. Empathy, genuine care and interest, veneration, body language, modelling, social learning networks, physical interaction, and kinaesthetics are all important in the teaching and learning process. Yet, with the rising AI-powered techno-capitalism in EdTech, the risk is that these valuable human elements of education will be unbundled and reserved for the privileged who can pay. This happened in the rise and fall of MOOCs, where the promise of democratising free access to education, turned into freemium models. This concern is particularly for low- and middle- income countries (LMICs) striving for cost-effectiveness: AI tutors may become the new mass public education system addressing basic academic needs, with crucial human heart and soul aspects missing from the educational offering. LMIC educators may be reduced to AI technology assistants, instead of cultivators of learning. Additionally, AI tools for education that are designed for supplementary use, may trickle down to LMICs and be used as the primary source of knowledge. This would further the divide between the privileged who have all the best AI and human support to reach their full flourishing, and the marginalised who receive a basic impersonal “personalised” education detached from deep human connections.
To brighter futures
In striving for equity, a human-centred approach is needed as we integrate AI into education systems, understanding its place, its limitations and its potential harms. Additionally, with AI undertaking many of the future jobs we thought we’d be educating the next generation for, an opportunity arises to re-envision education as a means for developing intrinsically motivated, holistic, empathetic, social learners rather than education for developing the next generation of workers. This education that is facilitated with, through and for the heart, mind and soul can be done through embarking on novel field trips and excursions (in real life or virtual reality!), learning in hands-on ways, exploring hobbies, pursuing passions, inspiring innovations and aspirations, volunteering, caring for the plant, and developing and nurturing socioemotional bonds with peers and educators.
* Image showing Murabit al Hajj with Habib Ali al-Jifri and Shaykh Hamza Yusuf, credit: Usernamex34.
These reflections are some of the important ones we are thinking about in the AI observatory, and we invite you all to consider them alongside us. We’ll be sharing more views and opinions from experts in the space, and we want to hear your thoughts as well! Join the conversation on LinkedIn.
