School is tough enough to begin with. I can't imagine how much more difficult and stressful it will be for these kids.

Beyond that it's also naive. I can't think of a faster way to destroy a work force's future variance in creativity than by having them all optimized for an opaque algorithm.

Many of the world's most accomplished found their genius through events and choices that cannot be optimized for. Heart break, substance abuse, loss - to name a few.

My experience is different than most peoples', but the key thing is that people have a _choice_ and can find out what works for them. The more we try to fit people into algorithms, and top-down control, the less they can go find out what they are happy doing and how they want to do it. Control, coercion, surveillance and manipulation tend to choke out the beauty of life.

My observation of school was that the ratio of 1 teacher to 25 students (who all have different learning speeds) means that the teacher is optimally teaching only a fraction of the kids, the rest at each side are overwhelmed or bored.

If the AI is able to help the slower students and stimulate the brighter ones, then I think that would have taken away a lot of the boredom for me and made it a much better experience

As an aside, I've often wondered if it's not class size that's the issue, but conflicting ability and personality types. Things like the GATE program grouped high ability kids, but personality matters and it would be interesting to match students together and with a compatible teacher. Of course, this might fail spectacularly as one of the benefits of diversity is getting other perspectives, and learning empathy. But I think it would be an interesting experiment, especially in a class like math.