If this past school year was about adults figuring out how to adapt systems and approaches to AI, the next school year should be about students actually experiencing something better because of the work the adults did.
For teachers, advocating for your classroom and students isn’t just about the big, visible moments, but the quiet ones: the follow-up email, the extra conversation, the willingness to try again after hearing “no.”
One of the more dangerous assumptions in the current AI market is that broad adoption means meaningful adoption. It does not. Much of what enterprises call AI transformation is, in fact, AI experimentation focused at the edge of the business, in systems and workflows that support employees but are not central to how the enterprise actually operates. These include calendaring, scheduling, meeting summaries, employee communications, customer messaging, document generation, internal assistants, and similar productivity-oriented use cases.
Those applications may be useful, but they are not core applications that directly run the business and determine whether the company performs well or poorly. Inventory management, sales order entry, logistics execution, supply chain planning, procurement, warehouse management, manufacturing operations, and financial transaction processing belong in this category. If these systems fail, the business feels it immediately through delayed orders, lost reven
A school district in New Hampshire updated its AI policy to stipulate which platforms are allowed and when students and staff must disclose their use, though some staff members raised questions about enforceability.
New dataset of 30,000-plus competition math problems from 47 countries gives AI researchers a harder test — and students worldwide a better training ground.