We also need school leaders who practice empathy towards teachers who want to experiment with AI in their classrooms. There was a time when I was so excited to experiment with using AI to provide feedback on student writing assignments, only to be punished and looked upon poorly by leadership and even parents. I built a custom-made system where I could take photos of student handwritten work, quiickly scan it, and have AI process it automatically. I thought this was an aweseome idea because I was combining the best of both worlds (traditional hand written work and AI to handle the huge workload of providing feedback almost daily for 100 students. But what parents and leadership wanted to see was a simple hand written check mark and sketch of a few words to make it look like I was giving a personalized touch, when in reality it was not possible to deeply analyze so many homework assignments.
Funny thing is, I come out of the classical education tradition myself with degrees in philosophy, Classics, and History, and a focus on medieval and early modern Europe. I’ve spent most of my career in highly intellectual school environments. And yet, I find myself firmly in the Mr. Mason camp. Maybe that’s because true classical education, at its best, isn’t about clinging to old tools, but rather cultivating judgment, empathy, and adaptability. In that sense, helping students navigate AI with nuance feels more aligned with the humanist tradition than rejecting it outright.
Interesting, Sean! I hope you evoke some discussion on this point. My sense is many academics studying the pre-16th century world are concerned for loss of knowledge. For example, I’ve heard concerns that Homer is fading from the awareness of the typical high school graduate. It’s getting more difficult to interest undergraduates in ancient literature. How might AI further erode this body of knowledge or, conversely, resurrect it?
People get kind of nervous when students stop reading Homer. Like something important is slipping away. But I don’t know. I don’t feel that same panic (and this may lose me my classicist cred).
Sure, Homer’s been a big cultural touchstone. So have a lot of things. But just because something’s lasted doesn’t mean everyone needs it. I think the real question is, what are we actually trying to preserve? Is it a name people recognize, or an experience that matters?
Because honestly, if a student never reads The Iliad but ends up thinking deeply about war and fate and loss because of something else entirely, haven’t they still touched the same core?
And this is where AI gets interesting. It could absolutely help keep the canon alive if we want that. But it could also widen the frame. Bring in stories and voices that haven’t had much space. Help students find the ideas that move them, not just the ones that moved people centuries ago.
So no, I don’t think everyone needs to read Homer. I care about him, but I don’t need anyone else to care just because I do. What I care about is whether people are still thinking hard about what matters and if they get there through different texts, or different tools, that seems fine to me.
You touch on what I call disciplinary fetishes—topics or concepts so central to a field of knowledge it seems unconscionable to suggest that not everyone needs to know about them. Dante puts Homer in limbo in his hellscape. James Joyce—should Joyce be required reading? Why read Homer if we don’t also assign all the writers who are somewhat derivative of him? It does seem a bit conflationary to argue that losing touch with ancient literature is a reason for banning AI. Also, why couldn’t AI contribute to studies of Homer? I read the Illiad and the Odyssey last year—loved them both—and read Circe, the novel by Madeleine Miller which extended the tale of Telemachus. AI was invaluable in shepherding me through these texts. This experience increased my excitement about LLMs as intellectual tools. It feels a bit unsettling to know that my description of my feelings are be viewed as sacrilege by those who are adamant about keeping LLMs out of academic work.
We also need school leaders who practice empathy towards teachers who want to experiment with AI in their classrooms. There was a time when I was so excited to experiment with using AI to provide feedback on student writing assignments, only to be punished and looked upon poorly by leadership and even parents. I built a custom-made system where I could take photos of student handwritten work, quiickly scan it, and have AI process it automatically. I thought this was an aweseome idea because I was combining the best of both worlds (traditional hand written work and AI to handle the huge workload of providing feedback almost daily for 100 students. But what parents and leadership wanted to see was a simple hand written check mark and sketch of a few words to make it look like I was giving a personalized touch, when in reality it was not possible to deeply analyze so many homework assignments.
Great incident for admin types to ponder, Dustin. Thanks.
Funny thing is, I come out of the classical education tradition myself with degrees in philosophy, Classics, and History, and a focus on medieval and early modern Europe. I’ve spent most of my career in highly intellectual school environments. And yet, I find myself firmly in the Mr. Mason camp. Maybe that’s because true classical education, at its best, isn’t about clinging to old tools, but rather cultivating judgment, empathy, and adaptability. In that sense, helping students navigate AI with nuance feels more aligned with the humanist tradition than rejecting it outright.
Interesting, Sean! I hope you evoke some discussion on this point. My sense is many academics studying the pre-16th century world are concerned for loss of knowledge. For example, I’ve heard concerns that Homer is fading from the awareness of the typical high school graduate. It’s getting more difficult to interest undergraduates in ancient literature. How might AI further erode this body of knowledge or, conversely, resurrect it?
People get kind of nervous when students stop reading Homer. Like something important is slipping away. But I don’t know. I don’t feel that same panic (and this may lose me my classicist cred).
Sure, Homer’s been a big cultural touchstone. So have a lot of things. But just because something’s lasted doesn’t mean everyone needs it. I think the real question is, what are we actually trying to preserve? Is it a name people recognize, or an experience that matters?
Because honestly, if a student never reads The Iliad but ends up thinking deeply about war and fate and loss because of something else entirely, haven’t they still touched the same core?
And this is where AI gets interesting. It could absolutely help keep the canon alive if we want that. But it could also widen the frame. Bring in stories and voices that haven’t had much space. Help students find the ideas that move them, not just the ones that moved people centuries ago.
So no, I don’t think everyone needs to read Homer. I care about him, but I don’t need anyone else to care just because I do. What I care about is whether people are still thinking hard about what matters and if they get there through different texts, or different tools, that seems fine to me.
You touch on what I call disciplinary fetishes—topics or concepts so central to a field of knowledge it seems unconscionable to suggest that not everyone needs to know about them. Dante puts Homer in limbo in his hellscape. James Joyce—should Joyce be required reading? Why read Homer if we don’t also assign all the writers who are somewhat derivative of him? It does seem a bit conflationary to argue that losing touch with ancient literature is a reason for banning AI. Also, why couldn’t AI contribute to studies of Homer? I read the Illiad and the Odyssey last year—loved them both—and read Circe, the novel by Madeleine Miller which extended the tale of Telemachus. AI was invaluable in shepherding me through these texts. This experience increased my excitement about LLMs as intellectual tools. It feels a bit unsettling to know that my description of my feelings are be viewed as sacrilege by those who are adamant about keeping LLMs out of academic work.
BTW, love the choice of names!
https://youtu.be/GtxuWycNgfo?si=SfojVJZ05ohgA4AQ