This chapter argues against the uncritical integration of generative AI (GenAI) into K-12 education, asserting that the primary goal of schooling should be cultivating engaged citizens and critical thinkers, not merely preparing a “workforce” dependent on rapidly changing technology. The author contends that GenAI is different from previous tools like calculators or search engines because it enables effective cheating without foundational competence, fostering a “cognitive debt” and dependence.

The case against GenAI rests on three pillars: workforce speculation (GenAI’s future necessity is unproven), technological volatility (the technology is unstable and subject to lawsuits), and the fundamental questions of learning. The author introduces the Bradford Hill criteria as a framework for evaluating the limited research, noting a telling “silence” from major edtech companies regarding product effectiveness. The chapter concludes that the choice is not about technology, but about what society believes education is for.