Dear Editor,

The Government’s decision to introduce artificial intelligence (AI) systems to support the National Standards Curriculum (NSC) marks one of the most ambitious educational reforms in recent years.

The initiative, which is tied to the proposed Jamaica Learning Assistant platform and broader national AI strategy, promises to transform teaching and learning across the island. According to Education Minister Senator Dr Dana Morris Dixon, the platform is intended to provide “AI-generated and curated content, fully aligned with the national curriculum” and give every child personalised learning 24/7.

At first glance, the benefits are undeniable. Yet beneath the excitement lies a more difficult question: Are we strengthening students’ thinking skills, or quietly weakening them?

There is no denying that Jamaica must prepare its students for a digital future. Government policy has already positioned the country as a science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM)-focused island, with initiatives such as STEM schools, digital access programmes, and teacher-technology support schemes.

But those of us in the humanities have advanced that we should not neglect the arts, therefore promoting STEAM (science, technology, engineering, arts, and mathematics).

AI assistants could bring several clear advantages:

1) Personalised learning — The proposed AI platform would adapt lessons to each student’s learning style and pace. This could be revolutionary in a system in which class sizes often make individual attention difficult.

Morris Dixon also highlighted that the tool would promote culturally relevant pedagogy, which is both a major and welcoming step in the AI dialogue. Research has consistently shown that large language models (LLMs) often demonstrate bias towards marginalised contexts.

2) Support for teachers — The minister argues that AI will reduce lesson planning and grading time, allowing teachers to focus on mentorship and creativity in the classroom.

Teachers’ workload is often cumbersome; therefore, having automated support would free up some time. However, human oversight is needed to balance pedagogical judgement.

3) Equity in access — In theory, an AI tutor available around the clock could level the playing field for students who cannot afford private lessons. In a country where access to quality academic support often depends on economic status, this could be a major social equaliser. Nevertheless, we must continue to address the issue of digital divide, as not all students have equal access to technological devices and the Internet.

Given AI’s role as a game-changer in education, rejecting it outright would be short-sighted. Education systems around the world are moving in this direction, and Jamaica cannot afford to be left behind. The future is even more digital, so we have to get with it.

But progress without reflection is dangerous. While AI promises efficiency, education is not merely about efficiency. It is about thinking, reading, questioning, and forming independent judgment. This is when the risks begin to emerge.

The national AI policy discussions themselves acknowledge that AI systems can produce errors and misinformation and must not be trusted blindly. If that is the case, what happens when students — especially younger ones — begin to depend on AI answers rather than developing their own reasoning? The concern is not theoretical. Already, many teachers report that students struggle with deep reading and sustained concentration. If AI becomes the first source of information rather than books, the result could be a generation that consumes answers but rarely analyses them.

The rapid integration of AI poses a silent — or perhaps obvious — threat to reading and cognitive development. Reading is slow. It demands patience, imagination, and critical engagement. AI, by contrast, is instant. It provides summaries, answers, and simplified explanations within seconds. If students begin to rely primarily on AI tools, which many are already doing, several consequences are likely.

Students will experience reduced ability to read long texts critically, weak vocabulary development, declining attention span, and limited capacity for independent thought. Ironically, the very technology designed to make learning easier may end up making students intellectually weaker if it replaces, rather than supports, reading.

Technology should support thinking, not replace it. Jamaica has already made satisfactory investments in digital education, including teacher-device initiatives and increased internet access. These programmes were designed to enhance teaching, not replace it. AI must follow the same principle.

As the country moves to implement this AI assistant, several safeguards are essential:

1) AI must be used as a support tool, not a substitute for reading. Students should still be required to read novels, textbooks, and long-form texts without technological shortcuts.

2) Teachers must remain central. No AI assistant can replace the emotional intelligence, mentorship, and moral guidance that teachers provide.

3) Critical thinking must be explicitly taught.

Students need to learn how to question AI responses, verify information, and recognise bias. The real issue is not whether AI should be used in education — it will be used. The real question is this: Will AI make our students smarter or simply faster at getting answers?

If implemented wisely, the technology could transform Jamaican education for the better. If implemented recklessly, it could weaken reading ability, critical thinking, and intellectual independence — skills that no machine can replace.

AI may be the future of education, but reading is still the foundation of intelligence. If we sacrifice that foundation in the name of technological progress, the cost will not be paid by the Government. It will be paid by the next generation.

Oneil Madden

maddenoniel@yahoo.com

Artificial intelligence is expected to reduce lesson planning and grading time.