In the world of education, financial constraints often stand in the way of adopting new technologies. Regardless of industry, almost every new endeavor costs money. In education, affording technology on and ongoing basis is a significant hurdle. The vast majority of K-12 schools simply lack the necessary funding to implement and sustain the advanced technological infrastructure to continuously capture, analyze and report observable classroom behaviors, discussions and performance.
Live data such as lectures, classroom discussions, and individualized feedback—key elements in understanding student engagement and performance—would likely be left out of the equation due to the high costs associated with installing and maintaining the necessary hardware and software, such as cameras, microphones, and storage systems.
Educational AI tools are predominantly designed to process and analyze text-based data, which is far easier to collect and quantify. These systems excel at analyzing written input, such as student essays, quizzes, and online assessments. However, even if schools could afford to capture live classroom activities, AI is not optimized to handle non-textual data formats such as audio or video. The complexity of analyzing spoken dialogue, body language, or group interactions in a classroom setting requires sophisticated algorithms that go beyond current AI capabilities, which have traditionally been built around text-driven data.
Text-based analysis is particularly well-suited for evaluating standard assessments like true/false, multiple-choice, and short-answer questions. However, this limitation means AI struggles to interpret and assess student performance in a variety of other content formats, which are crucial for a holistic understanding of student learning. For example, visual representations like diagrams, posters, and artwork are rich with meaning but difficult for AI to evaluate in a nuanced way. Similarly, hands-on projects such as dioramas, models, and maps require an understanding of spatial relationships and creativity that AI currently cannot grasp.
Beyond static projects, dynamic classroom activities further challenge AI's abilities. Student participation in discussions, historical reenactments, multimedia presentations, science experiments, and skits provides valuable insights into skills like collaboration, critical thinking, and creativity—none of which are easily quantifiable through text. Physical education, music recitals, and other performance-based activities require an entirely different approach to evaluation, one that AI is not yet capable of executing effectively.
In sum, the reliance on text-based analysis limits the full potential of AI in education, particularly when it comes to capturing and assessing the richness of student experiences in the classroom. Without the ability to process live data or interpret non-textual content formats, AI tools remain constrained in their ability to provide a comprehensive view of student learning. This gap highlights the need for future advancements in AI that can encompass the full spectrum of educational activities, beyond written tests and assignments.
Go to Part VI
Comments