Chicago Public Schools comprise a vast, labyrinthine system boasting over 316,000 students across 630 locations. Many rank among America’s best. Many others are chronically underperforming Title 1 schools, with high volumes of students coming from economically disadvantaged families, ranking among the nation’s worst. AI could play a massive role in undoing the socioeconomic and racial gaps in educational outcomes that have come to characterize American metropolises like Chicago. But there’s a problem: AI programming is accelerating much faster in the nation’s high-income K-12 schools.
I was an evaluator for a nonprofit that provides student support services to Chicago high schools. Whenever I made my initial rounds at a school, a quick peek at its technological resources was often a reliable predictor of its ability to meet students’ broad needs. The differences in the quality and volume of computing labs at a school like Lincoln Park High School on Chicago’s wealthy north side, where the local population is 75% white, versus Raby High School, located in economically distressed East Garfield Park which is 83% Black, were stark.
In addition to having a broad, updated fleet of technology, Lincoln Park High School has a robust slate of computer science classes and a coveted International Baccalaureate program for academically gifted students. A 2013 plan under former Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel to make Raby High School a high-tech STEM school never quite took flight, with the school today having a modest lineup of computing resources and just a couple of tech-oriented courses.
Students in communities like East Garfield Park typically receive a poorer-quality education and graduate at lower rates than their peers in high-income communities. Sociologists like me typically attribute this to the combined effects of segregation and community disinvestment. And it doesn’t help that educators in Title 1 schools are consistently underpaid, under-supported, and undertrained. And it’s not just an urban issue. Rural schools, long America’s most technologically disconnected, are under threat of being left behind, too.
The burgeoning AI in education space currently has a global market that’ll reach roughly $7.1 billion this year and a staggering $112.3 billion by 2034. The immediate consequences are clear: many students from low-income backgrounds across America won’t be able to tap into AI’s ever-evolving toolkit to creatively and seamlessly brainstorm ideas, conduct research, edit assignments, and, in short, excel in classes like their peers from high-income families. Given AI’s rapidly expanding ceiling, the achievement gap between youth who are well versed in AI and those who aren’t may be astronomical. Racial minority students may suffer the most.
A 2024 assessment from RAND found that around 61% of primary teachers with mostly nonwhite students had received no AI training compared to about 35% of teachers with primarily white students. As white school districts continue to pour resources into AI, this chasm will only deepen. This means white students won’t just get first dibs on the latest and best AI technology, but an upper-hand on the skills that are going to propel the future economy.
As this all plays out, some of my peers have argued against increasing young students’ engagement with AI. Their argument hinges on the unsettled idea that recurrent exposure to AI will lead to “cognitive offloading” and dependency, which, in turn, will reduce youths’ neurological development, specifically their problem-solving skills.
Other critics point to AI’s entrenched cultural and racial biases, expressing concerns that students may unconsciously absorb prejudices being relayed to them through AI chatbots and the like. And to be sure, there aren’t currently many guidelines or guardrails for AI implementation in education. Still, for many, including educators like myself, AI’s benefits for students demonstrably outweigh the negatives. But only if we’re smart about how we approach students’ AI skill development.
Currently, AI skills can be said to revolve around two things: AI literacy and AI competency. AI literacy concerns one’s knowledge of the purpose, functions, and ethics of AI. Competency in AI, in turn, relates to the subsequent development of technical skills, such as being able to get an AI chatbot to gather and synthesize information or analyze a spreadsheet. Many of the middle and upper-income jobs that youth will be applying for in the near future–in fields like engineering, finance, law, and healthcare–will prioritize, if not outright be restricted to, applicants who can use, create, and/or maintain AI-driven platforms.
Already, low-income students, especially those who are Black and Latino, are at a considerable disadvantage when it comes to digital skills, much of this tied to their lower levels of access to computers and the internet. A national study from the Urban Institute showed that 48% of Black youth and 31% of Latino youth have little or no independent digital skills–such as using word processors or finding and applying for jobs online–compared to just 16% of white youth.
Even in professions where AI won’t outright replace human roles, there’s a good chance it’ll shrink their scope, transforming full-time roles into part-time ones and salaried positions into non-benefits-eligible hourly positions. Youth–especially those without a college degree–who are entering the workforce in the next decade will be especially vulnerable to this shift. Currently, Black people are overrepresented in four of the top five jobs at risk of automation, which include jobs in office support and food services. There’ll be an inevitable dampening of wages in these industries, coupled with higher risks of unemployment. This is no small part of why AI is forecasted to increase the wealth gap between Black and white households by an estimated $43 billion annually over the next 20 years.
There’s a growing consensus among experts that youth should be exposed to AI fairly early on, albeit very thoughtfully. And fortunately, teens are optimistic about AI having a positive impact on their learning at school. There are several ways we can seize on their enthusiasm.
Right now, a lack of funding serves as the most significant obstacle to balancing the AI divide, but new federal interest in scaling AI presents opportunities. This past April, President Trump signed an executive order that calls for a task force to devise plans to create a K-12 education system that’s capable of fostering an AI-ready workforce. It’s critical that the task force’s recommendations on prioritizing funding to Title 1 schools and communities most deeply affected by the longstanding digital divide, as well as communities that stand to lose the most jobs due to AI.
Policymakers and school administrators should also create AI learning standards centered around teaching students AI ethics, how to detect AI and recognize AI-derived mistakes, and perform basic tasks like information gathering and aggregation. Standards like these will ensure schools are earnestly working towards developing students’ AI literacy and competency and keeping educators accountable.
Finally, there is a need to reimagine our school-industry relationships, a key conduit for advancing AI in our education systems. As former education lead at Apple, Nidhi Hebbar, explained in a 2023 interview, when Big Tech works with K-12 schools, they typically do so with wealthier, white schools, which already have significant administrative and technological resources in place. Policymakers should compel Big Tech to develop long-term partnerships with disadvantaged school districts that focus on upskilling educators through ongoing AI training and providing students with access to free AI tools and resources. This commitment should also consist of supporting community-centered initiatives that provide youth with education on AI entrepreneurship and pathways for AI-focused internships.
AI has the potential to help America regain ground in global education and create equity across all races–a long-sought but elusive ambition. This can’t happen if our institutions remain focused on increasing access among privileged youth and simultaneously continue underinvesting in our nation’s underprivileged youth.
The opinions expressed in Fortune.com commentary pieces are solely the views of their authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinions and beliefs of Fortune.
