AI to "Personalise" Education? More Like Corner the Market

“AI can grade quizzes and supervise your child’s learning! Because clearly, that’s all teaching is, right? Just tick off a few boxes, and voilà, education is revolutionised!” It’s hard not to laugh at the relentless optimism in articles like this one, where AI is presented as the saviour of education, poised to take over the burdensome tasks that, in the tech world’s imagination, are the only things keeping teachers from achieving classroom utopia. Automated grading? Check. Customised lessons? Sorted. And who needs human connection when an algorithm can handle everything with precision, right?

But let’s cut through the hype. The push for AI in education isn’t about creating personalised, meaningful learning experiences for students. It’s about monopolising the sector and making sure these tech companies get their foot in the door before their competitors do. Think Jack Welch’s ruthless business philosophy dressed up in the shiny, futuristic language of “personalisation.” The goal isn’t to help students or teachers—it’s to be the first to dominate the market, locking schools into a system where education becomes just another product to be controlled, automated, and sold off in tidy little packages. And all whilst promising solutions that, in reality, miss the mark entirely.

Personalisation—The Trojan Horse for Market Domination

“Personalisation” sounds so… bespoke, doesn’t it? As though AI has thoughtfully tailored a lesson plan just for your child, complete with a perfectly measured amount of empathy and care. But let’s not get carried away by the glossy tech-speak. What these companies are really saying is, “Let us control every student’s data while we tighten our grip on the education market.” It’s a Trojan horse. By dressing up their algorithms in the warm, fuzzy language of “personalisation,” AI companies aim to make their way into classrooms under the guise of doing what’s best for students, all the while ensuring they become indispensable to the system. And once they’re in, good luck getting them out.

The real ambition here isn’t about transforming education for the better; it’s about transforming the market. Just like Jack Welch, the notorious corporate kingpin, famously said: “If you’re not number one, you’re out.” These AI companies have taken that mantra and run with it. Their race to introduce so-called “solutions” for the classroom isn’t motivated by an altruistic desire to fix education’s woes. It’s about being the first to plant their flag in schools and corner the market before anyone else can. In a game where dominance means endless streams of data and long-term contracts with educational institutions, the actual needs of students are a distant second to the financial prize.

What’s the result? A future where education is owned not by educators but by tech giants whose end goal is market control. Imagine a world where these companies dictate how schools run, from curriculum design to assessment methods, all based on what best serves their bottom line, not the needs of students or teachers. When they talk about "personalisation," they’re talking about data. When they promise to “transform” education, what they really mean is they’ll transform it into something they control. For teachers and students, it’s not personalisation—it’s corporatisation. AI is the shiny new tool, but the game remains the same: dominate, automate, and monopolise. And in the end, education, much like the students within it, becomes a product to be bought and sold.

The Hollow Claims of AI’s “Revolution”

The idea that AI can “solve” education simply by automating tasks is laughable at best. Sure, grading quizzes might be a minor convenience, but it’s hardly the heart of what teachers do. Try getting a room full of teenagers to actually care about Hamlet’s existential angst or to feel genuinely curious about quadratic equations. I’m sure a robot, with all its machine-like charm, will be just brilliant at conveying the raw human emotion of Shakespeare’s Denmark. Because nothing says “deeply relatable” like a cold, algorithmic analysis of Ophelia’s tragic demise.

These AI companies love to overpromise, painting a utopian picture where all the mundane tasks of teaching are taken care of, freeing up educators to be their most inspirational selves. But here’s the thing: grading quizzes isn’t what’s burning teachers out. Underfunding, overcrowded classrooms, and endless bureaucracy are the real culprits. Yet, instead of addressing these glaring issues, tech companies offer up AI like it’s some magical cure-all. They slap an algorithm on the problem, declare it “revolutionary," and expect applause. Meanwhile, the actual challenges in education remain untouched.

Let’s get real: teachers are still drowning in classrooms packed with 40+ students, most of whom don’t even have enough textbooks to go around. The schools that desperately need support are the ones least likely to afford the luxury of AI tools in the first place. So where does this leave us? With a shiny, expensive distraction that’s being sold as the future of education whilst doing next to nothing to fix its present.

The reality is these tech companies are more interested in selling their AI solutions than in solving actual educational problems. They trot out buzzwords like “personalisation” and “efficiency,” hoping no one notices that their high-tech toys aren’t addressing the root causes of teacher burnout or student disengagement. But what they really want is market dominance. It’s easier to sell AI as a fix for education than to face the complex, human issues that plague the system. And once they’ve got a foothold in the market, they’re not going to be concerned with whether students are learning or teachers are supported—they’ll be too busy counting profits from long-term contracts and selling more “upgrades” to their latest classroom robot.

So, yes, AI might be able to grade a few quizzes, but don’t expect it to inspire the next generation of thinkers, solve the crisis of teacher burnout, or bring equity to underfunded schools. What we’re left with are overblown claims of a “revolution” that, like most revolutions in ed-tech, will fizzle out, leaving educators to deal with the same problems they’ve always faced, only now with an expensive robot in the corner of the classroom.

The Danger of Monopolistic AI in Education

When we talk about monopolising education technology, it’s not just about who controls the software in schools—it’s about who controls the future of education itself. And when AI companies dominate this space, students, especially the most vulnerable, become the collateral damage. Jack Welch may have championed a ruthless approach of “fix it, close it, or sell it,” but in the context of education, these tech giants seem more focused on “control it, own it, and profit from it.” The result? A system that prioritises market share and data collection over the actual needs of students, particularly those who are already struggling.

This is especially worrying when we think about students with specific learning disabilities or other special educational needs. How exactly is AI going to teach a child with dyslexia to read? Can an algorithm truly adapt to the nuances of that student’s unique struggles, offering the patience, creativity, and personalised support required? The idea that AI can step in and replace the tailored, human approach these children need is not just misguided—it’s dangerous. Special education relies on more than just structured content delivery; it’s about building trust, understanding emotional and behavioural cues, and adjusting teaching strategies on the fly. Good luck coding that into your AI assistant, ‘NOAH.’

AI may be great at crunching data or automating repetitive tasks, but it cannot replace the irreplaceable: human connection. Learning isn’t just about absorbing information; it’s about the relationships built in the process. For vulnerable students—whether they have specific learning disabilities, come from marginalised backgrounds, or simply need more support—a real, caring human being is essential. A teacher’s ability to sense frustration, offer encouragement, and connect on a personal level is something no AI can replicate, no matter how sophisticated.

As AI monopolises more of the education sector, we risk losing the very heart of what makes learning effective: the human touch. If we let the future of education be dictated by tech companies with monopolistic ambitions, we’ll be trading human connection for cold efficiency, and students, particularly the most vulnerable, will be the ones paying the price.

Why AI Isn’t the Solution We’re Looking For

The real problems in education are staring us in the face, but AI isn’t going to fix them. Burnout, lack of funding, oversized classrooms—these are the challenges teachers confront daily, none of which can be solved by an AI assistant, no matter how many bells and whistles it has. We don’t need yet another expensive gadget to automate tasks; we need to invest in real human solutions. Teachers are drowning in paperwork, overcrowded classrooms, and unrealistic expectations, all while being underpaid and undervalued. The idea that AI will swoop in and magically alleviate all these problems is nothing more than a shiny distraction from the deeper issues that plague education.

Instead of pouring billions into the latest “AI-powered teaching assistant / replacement,” how about paying teachers a living wage and giving them the time and resources to actually do their jobs? It’s not that complicated. Teachers need smaller class sizes so they can give each student the attention they deserve. They need better funding so they’re not spending their own money on classroom supplies. They need mental health support and manageable workloads so they don’t burn out before they’ve even hit mid-career. Throwing AI at the problem is like trying to patch a sinking ship with duct tape—it might look like a solution, but it’s not going to hold up under real pressure.

The truth is, education doesn’t need to be “revolutionised” by technology. What it needs is to be respected, funded, and supported in a way that prioritises students and teachers, not tech companies’ profit margins. AI won’t reduce the class sizes that leave students without enough individual attention. It won’t fix the crumbling infrastructure of schools or provide the emotional support that teachers offer students every day. And it certainly won’t address the inequities that persist in underfunded schools, where students are already struggling without access to basic resources.

The AI revolution in education is nothing more than a shiny distraction, designed to keep us from talking about what really matters: investing in people. We don’t need a robot to teach our children; we need more teachers, better pay, and classrooms that aren’t bursting at the seams. Until AI can solve real problems like broken printers, outdated textbooks, and underfunded schools, I’ll pass on the robot revolution in education.

Because at the end of the day, no amount of AI will ever replace the value of a passionate teacher who understands the unique needs of their students, who can offer a kind word when a child is struggling, and who knows that education is about more than just passing exams. It’s about human connection, growth, and inspiration—all things no algorithm will ever understand.

Final thoughts …

It’s almost impressive, isn’t it? “Carl Williams” (the “author of the source article”)manages to churn out more articles in a week than most of us could even dream of writing in a month. It’s almost as if Carl isn’t a real person at all, but rather a well-oiled AI content machine programmed to crank out endless tech propaganda. And therein lies the danger. As we increasingly rely on AI-generated marketing disguised as “news” or “insight,” we’re being steered toward a future built on half-truths and corporate agendas. Meanwhile, the actual people behind these companies—the ones raking in the profits—are laughing all the way to the bank.

You can bet their kids won’t be subjected to robot teachers or AI-powered “personalised learning experiences.” No, they’ll be safely ensconced in private schools, taught by real humans who understand the value of creativity, critical thinking, and genuine human interaction. But for the rest of us? We’re being sold a future where education is nothing more than a series of automated tasks designed to extract data and generate profit. And let’s face it, we’re falling for it, one “Carl Williams” article at a time.

So next time you read about how AI is set to revolutionise education (again), remember that behind the glowing promises and slick marketing, there’s an algorithm writing the story. And it’s not writing it for the benefit of students or teachers—it’s writing it for the shareholders. Enjoy the revolution!