;)
The embodiment of that idea is his latest venture, , which is merely the newest prominent example of how tech entrepreneurs are seeking to use AI to revolutionize education.
Karpathy believes AI can solve a long-standing challenge: the who are also subject experts.
And he鈥檚 not alone. OpenAI CEO , Khan Academy , venture capitalist and University of California, Berkeley computer scientist also dream of bots becoming , and perhaps even replacements for human teachers.
As a researcher focused on AI and , I鈥檝e seen many cases of high-tech 鈥渟olutions鈥� for teaching problems that fizzled. AI certainly may enhance aspects of education, but history shows that bots probably won鈥檛 be an effective substitute for humans. That鈥檚 because students have long shown resistance to machines, however sophisticated, and a natural preference to connect with and be inspired by fellow humans.
The costly challenge of teaching writing to the masses
As the director of the at the University of Pittsburgh, I oversee instruction for some 7,000 students a year. Programs like mine have long wrestled with how to teach writing efficiently and effectively to so many people at once.
The best answer so far is to keep class sizes . Research shows that in smaller classes because they are more engaged.
Yet small classes require more instructors, and that can get .
Resuscitating dead scholars
Enter AI. Imagine, Karpathy , that the great theoretical physicist , who has been dead for over 35 years, could be brought back to life as a bot to tutor students.
For Karpathy, an ideal learning experience would be working through physics material 鈥渢ogether with Feynman, who is there to guide you every step of the way.鈥� Feynman, renowned for his accessible way of presenting theoretical physics, could work with an unlimited number of students at the same time.
In this vision, human teachers still design course materials, but they are supported by an AI teaching assistant. This teacher-AI team 鈥渃ould run an entire curriculum of courses on a common platform,鈥� Karpathy wrote. 鈥淚f we are successful, it will be easy for anyone to learn anything,鈥� whether it be a lot of people learning about one subject, or one person learning about many subjects.
Other efforts to personalize learning fall short
Yet technologies for personal learning aren鈥檛 new. Exactly 100 years ago, at the 1924 meeting of the American Psychological Association, inventor Sidney Pressey unveiled an 鈥渁utomatic teacher鈥� that asked multiple-choice questions.
In the 1950s, the psychologist designed 鈥渢eaching machines.鈥� If a student answered a question correctly, the machine advanced to ask about the problem鈥檚 next step. If not, the student stayed on that step of the problem until they solved it.
In both cases, students received positive feedback for correct answers. This gave them confidence as well as skills in the subject. The problem was that students didn鈥檛 learn much 鈥� they also found these nonhuman approaches boring, education writer Audrey Watters documents in 鈥�.鈥�
More recently, the world of education of 鈥渕assive open online courses,鈥� or MOOCs. These classes, which delivered video and quizzes, were heralded by The New York Times and others for their . Again, students lost interest and logged off.
Other web-based efforts have popped up, including course platforms like Coursera and Outlier. But the same problem persists: There鈥檚 no genuine interactivity to keep students engaged. One of the latest casualties in online learning was 2U, which acquired leading MOOC company edX in 2021 and in July 2024 filed for bankruptcy restructuring to reduce its . The culprit: falling demand for services.
Now comes the proliferation of AI-fueled platforms. Khanmigo deploys AI tutors to, as Sal Khan , 鈥減ersonalize and customize coaching, as well as adapt to an individual鈥檚 needs while hovering beside our learners as they work.鈥�
The educational publisher Pearson, too, . More than 1,000 universities .
AI in education isn鈥檛 just coming; it鈥檚 here. The question is how effective it will be.
Drawbacks in AI learning
Some tech leaders believe bots can customize teaching and replace human teachers and tutors, but they鈥檙e likely to face the same problem as these earlier attempts: Students may not like it.
There are important reasons why, too. Students are unlikely to be inspired and excited the way they can be by a live instructor. Students in crisis often for help. Would they do the same with a bot? And what would the bot do if they did? We don鈥檛 know yet.
A lack of data privacy and security can also be a deterrent. These platforms collect volumes of information on students and their academic performance that can be misused or sold. Legislation may try to prevent this, but , out of reach of U.S. law.
Finally, there are concerns even if AI tutors and teachers become popular. If a bot teaches millions of students at once, we may lose diversity of thought. Where does originality come from when everyone receives the same teachings, especially if 鈥渁cademic success鈥� relies on regurgitating what the AI instructor says?
The idea of an AI tutor in every pocket sounds exciting. I would love to learn physics from Richard Feynman or writing from Maya Angelou or astronomy from Carl Sagan. But history reminds us to be cautious and keep a close eye on whether students are actually learning. The promises of personalized learning are no guarantee for positive results.
This article is republished from under a Creative Commons license. Read the .
