Enhancing student agency through school AI councils

Education Policy Education Technology Global Education K-12 Education

教育政策 教育技术 全球教育 K-12 教育

The search for relevant sources and light copyediting for this piece were provided by Copilot, a Microsoft generative AI tool .

这篇文章的相关来源搜索和轻度文案编辑是由微软生成式人工智能工具 Copilot 提供的。

The output was reviewed and revised for factual accuracy by the author, copyedited again by a human, and checked for plagiarism prior to publication.

作者对输出内容进行了审查和修改以确保事实准确性，并由人工再次进行编辑，并在出版前检查是否存在抄袭。

The AI tool did not contribute any original ideas to the commentary.

AI工具没有为评论贡献任何原创想法。

After learning about the risks of AI-enabled cognitive offloading from school founder and Brookings Nonresident Fellow Urvashi Sahni , students at Study Hall School in Lucknow, India formed an AI task force.

在从学校创始人、布鲁金斯学会非常驻研究员 Urvashi Sahni 那里了解到人工智能支持的认知卸载的风险后，印度勒克瑙 Study Hall 学校的学生组建了一个人工智能特别工作组。

They researched AI’s benefits and risks, developed guidelines for responsible use, and are now helping shape school policy while facilitating peer dialogue.

他们研究了人工智能的好处和风险，制定了负责任的使用指南，现在正在帮助制定学校政策，同时促进同伴对话。

In Austin, Texas, students led by high school junior Ruhan Gupta—with support from school leadership—have proposed SPARK (Student Policy Advisory for Responsible AI in K-12) to their district.

在德克萨斯州奥斯汀，高中生 Ruhan Gupta 带领的学生在学校领导层的支持下，向所在学区提出了 SPARK（K-12 负责任人工智能学生政策咨询）。

The proposed council would engage its 12 high school members in a range of activities including testing and auditing AI tools, contributing to policy development, and leading engagement with peers and families.

拟议的委员会将让 12 名高中成员参与一系列活动，包括测试和审核人工智能工具、为政策制定做出贡献以及引导同龄人和家庭的参与。

These examples point to what is possible—but the broader opportunity is even more significant.

这些例子表明了可能性，但更广泛的机会更为重要。

As the 2026-2027 school year gets underway across the United States, schools would do well to try something new: establishing student AI councils.

随着 2026-2027 学年在美国各地开始，学校最好尝试一些新的东西：建立学生人工智能委员会。

As these sample cases showcase, the goal should not be to occasionally consult students on AI-related ideas but to have students beta-test products, lead conversations around AI use, review procurement contracts, or test teachers’ assignments for AI hackability.

正如这些示例案例所展示的那样，我们的目标不应该是偶尔向学生咨询人工智能相关的想法，而是让学生对产品进行 Beta 测试、围绕人工智能的使用进行对话、审查采购合同或测试教师作业的人工智能可破解性。

And with student AI use—and AI dissatisfaction—growing, instating student councils could proactively address these issues and more.

随着学生对人工智能的使用以及对人工智能的不满情绪不断增长，设立学生会可以主动解决这些问题以及更多问题。

Survey data have shown a steady increase in American students’ use of AI, with almost 85% of high schoolers using AI for schoolwork.

调查数据显示，美国学生对人工智能的使用稳步增长，近 85% 的高中生使用人工智能完成作业。

At the same time, this past year saw unprecedented student pushback against AI.

与此同时，去年学生对人工智能的抵制前所未有。

A recent survey by Gallup and the Walton Family Foundation found that Gen Z’s negative sentiments about AI are growing, with less than one in five young people feeling hopeful about the technology.

盖洛普和沃尔顿家庭基金会最近的一项调查发现，Z 世代对人工智能的负面情绪正在增长，不到五分之一的年轻人对这项技术抱有希望。

Students often express wide-ranging concerns about AI—from shrinking job opportunities to climate change.

学生们经常表达对人工智能的广泛担忧——从工作机会减少到气候变化。

But one of the most striking worries is that of AI undermining their cognitive development.

但最令人担忧的问题之一是人工智能会破坏他们的认知发展。

This concern is widespread.

这种担忧很普遍。

A 2025 global survey found that AI’s potential to “erode human intelligence, creativity, and critical thinking” is a top concern of young people alongside disruptions to work.

一项 2025 年全球调查发现，人工智能“侵蚀人类智力、创造力和批判性思维”的潜力是年轻人最关心的问题，同时也是对工作的干扰。

Put simply, many young people worry that “AI is making us stupid.”

简而言之，许多年轻人担心“人工智能让我们变得愚蠢”。

This tension between students’ AI worries and their use of it surfaces in most of my conversations with young people.

在我与年轻人的大部分对话中，学生对人工智能的担忧和他们对人工智能的使用之间的紧张关系显而易见。

It’s present in our Brookings Global Task Force on AI and Education research and in my focus groups with students today.

它出现在我们的布鲁金斯学会人工智能和教育研究全球工作组以及我今天与学生的焦点小组中。

Young people are eager to learn and develop, and they worry that generative AI could undermine that growth, creating cycles of dependency and disengagement.

年轻人渴望学习和发展，他们担心生成式人工智能可能会破坏这种增长，造成依赖和脱离的循环。

At the same time, they resort to AI use when they feel an assignment is busy work, when they are overwhelmed, have run out of time, or feel pressured to keep up with peers.

与此同时，当他们觉得任务很繁忙、不知所措、时间不够，或者感到跟上同事的压力时，他们就会求助于人工智能。

Students’ discomfort with using AI to do their schoolwork is well-founded.

学生对使用人工智能完成作业感到不舒服是有充分理由的。

Struggle, effortful thinking, and learning from mistakes are central to developing critical and independent thinking.

奋斗、努力思考以及从错误中学习是培养批判性和独立思考的核心。

Brain development remains highly active through age 25, making the quality of learning experiences especially consequential.

到 25 岁，大脑发育仍然高度活跃，因此学习体验的质量尤其重要。

Students are right to question whether current uses of AI are eroding their cognitive development.

学生们有理由质疑当前人工智能的使用是否正在侵蚀他们的认知发展。

There is an urgent need to break through this struggle with an approach that helps students avoid AI’s risks but harnesses its benefits.

迫切需要通过一种方法来突破这场斗争，帮助学生避免人工智能的风险，同时利用它的好处。

The central challenge is, as we concluded in the 17 Rooms education working group—which convened experts to discuss AI and education in relation to fulfilling Sustainable Development Goal 4 (Quality Education)—finding approaches that move students from ‘dependence to agency.’ One concrete step toward this goal is establishing a student AI council in every school.

正如我们在 17 个房间教育工作组中得出的结论，该工作组召集了专家讨论人工智能和与实现可持续发展目标 4（优质教育）相关的教育，找到使学生从“依赖到代理”的方法。实现这一目标的一个具体步骤是在每所学校建立一个学生人工智能委员会。

Student councils alone do not automatically increase engagement or agency.

学生会本身并不会自动增加参与度或代理性。

Without clearly defined roles, meaningful influence, and visible pathways to change, they risk becoming tokenistic.

如果没有明确定义的角色、有意义的影响力和可见的变革途径，他们就有可能变得象征性的。

Research also shows important equity gaps: Students in higher-income schools are more likely to participate in substantive decisionmaking, while those in lower-income schools are often limited to low-stakes activities such as organizing school dances and social events.

研究还显示了重要的公平差距：高收入学校的学生更有可能参与实质性决策，而低收入学校的学生往往仅限于组织学校舞会和社交活动等低风险活动。

Yet when designed well, student councils can be powerful.

然而，如果设计得当，学生会可以发挥强大的作用。

They can strengthen schools’ effective decisionmaking, improve student engagement, build trust between students and educators, and contribute to better learning outcomes.

它们可以加强学校的有效决策，提高学生的参与度，在学生和教育工作者之间建立信任，并有助于取得更好的学习成果。

Recent data from more than 9,500 young people collected globally show that youth are eager for a real seat at the table in reimagining education.

最近从全球收集的 9,500 多名年轻人的数据表明，年轻人渴望在重新构想教育的过程中获得真正的席位。

The key is to move from giving students voice to centering it.

关键是从给予学生发言权转向集中发言权。

This shift means moving beyond consultation toward shared responsibility (see Figure 1 below).

这种转变意味着超越协商，转向共同责任（见下图 1）。

Centering student voice transforms councils from forums for sharing opinions into engines of co-creation—where students help define problems, design solutions, implement changes, and share responsibility for outcomes.

以学生的声音为中心，将理事会从分享意见的论坛转变为共同创造的引擎——学生帮助定义问题、设计解决方案、实施变革并分担对结果的责任。

It requires schools and educators to shift their perspective: their job is not to give students a voice but to transform spaces so their voices can meaningfully contribute to solving problems.

它要求学校和教育工作者转变他们的观点：他们的工作不是让学生发出声音，而是改变空间，以便他们的声音能够为解决问题做出有意义的贡献。

Source: Emily Markovich Morris and Omaer Naeem, 2023, ‘Handing over the mic: The difference between centering and giving youth voices in research and practice.’

资料来源：Emily Markovich Morris 和 Omaer Naeem，2023 年，“移交麦克风：在研究和实践中集中和给予年轻人声音之间的区别。”

There are at least five ways in which student AI councils, when designed with centering student voice in mind, could contribute to charting a constructive path forward for quality learning in an AI world.

当学生人工智能委员会以学生的声音为中心而设计时，至少可以通过五种方式为人工智能世界的高质量学习制定建设性的道路。

Student AI councils are not just a timely way engage students in charting the path of their own educational futures; they can serve as a quiet but powerful lever for rebalancing power in education.

学生人工智能委员会不仅是让学生参与规划自己教育未来道路的及时方式；它们可以成为重新平衡教育权力的安静而强大的杠杆。

By positioning students as co-designers rather than passive recipients, they begin to shift long-standing assumptions about who holds expertise, who makes decisions, and whose voices count.

通过将学生定位为共同设计师而不是被动的接受者，他们开始改变长期以来关于谁拥有专业知识、谁做出决定以及谁的声音重要的假设。

In this sense, student AI councils could open the door to deeper transformation.

从这个意义上说，学生人工智能委员会可以打开更深层次转型的大门。

What begins as a focused effort to address AI may ultimately catalyze broader redesign of schooling itself: from compliance to curiosity, from task completion to authentic learning, and from dependence to agency.

最初专注于解决人工智能问题可能最终会促进学校教育本身的更广泛的重新设计：从服从到好奇心，从任务完成到真实学习，从依赖到代理。

The Brookings Institution is committed to quality, independence, and impact.

布鲁金斯学会致力于质量、独立性和影响力。

We are supported by a diverse array of funders .

我们得到了众多资助者的支持。

In line with our values and policies , each Brookings publication represents the sole views of its author(s).

根据我们的价值观和政策，布鲁金斯学会的每份出版物均代表其作者的唯一观点。

Education Policy Education Technology Global Education K-12 Education

教育政策 教育技术 全球教育 K-12 教育