Challenge to the 100 Year Study
	The 100 year study incorrectly assesses the current state of AI in education and also the
future prospects AI has in the realm of learning on upper education levels. While the study is quite 
bullish on both the current impact and an increasing role in the future, the reality is that AI in 
its current form has not helped, but rather has impeded learning on an advanced level.
	As any college student who has taken an online class knows, AI encourages cheating and constant 
google searching, while detracting from any analytical learning and deep thinking. The crux of the 
problem with AI in education is that while it is interactive and fun, it does not encourage users 
to read or memorize anything, as all information will be accessible on google for future tests and 
assessments. For this reason I strongly disagree with their sentiment that AI promises to enhance 
education at all levels. They do very little to support this claim, and it appears to be baseless
in any sort or reliable study or data. While online education does definitely increase convenience,
a vast majority of students and educators would admit it is far inferior to pen and paper homework.
For grade school and maybe even high school, I believe there is a place for AI to aid in the simpler
subjects that can be explained by a short video, however at the college level it does not appear to
play much of a role due to its ineffectiveness. Take Khan academy for example, it is a revolutionary
database of math subjects and explanations that has helped many conquer high school math courses in 
half the time it would take them to listen to their teacher. However any calculus 2 student knows that
for anything more than surface knowledge it is essentially useless in the course, as the problems are 
simply too complex and diverse for a video lecture to cover or learn from. It is in this type of 
education that AI is no real match for pencil, paper, and physical in classroom lecturing. 
	The challenges section on education makes very little sense to me. After profusely praising how much AI
has helped increase the number of students in classrooms and enhancing learning, they excuse its lack of
implementation by saying Much of its absence can be explained by the lack of financial resources of
these institutions as well as the lack of data establishing the technologies effectiveness. If AI
truly helped expand classes for colleges and simultaneously enhanced learning for students, it would 
seem far fetched for schools not to invest more in it. It would also seem trivial that expanding classes
while limiting the amount of added teachers would save the school money, not cost it more. What the study
seems to be missing is that schools are not avoiding AI because of a lack of data, but rather because in 
their experiences it detracts from learning, not enhances it.
	To sum up briefly, while it is impossible to predict with any sense of accuracy what AIs role in education
will be down the road, it is clear that right now it is more gimmicky than it is helpful. Online classes and
learning modules promote quick bursts of information tailored to short attention spans, and take away from 
the true learning that as of right now can only be executed in the traditional classroom. For those who need to 
learn base knowledge quickly, it is unmatched in combining effectiveness, convenience, and speed. However it 
does not have depth, which is paramount to higher education learning and is why its hard to see AI playing a
larger role in the college classroom in the near future. 
