Accessibility and the AI Social Divide
In my search for articles for this assignment, I came across ‘Generation AI: fears of "social divide" unless all children learn computing skills’ published in the Guardian just a month ago. The author’s warning about the divide between those who understand AI and those who simply use it resonated with me. Seeing my own teenagers interact with these tools, and teaching students who do the same, has made me realize how critical this 'computing gap' has become. This is where I am coming from, and perhaps this is my bias. My perspective is, therefore, undoubtedly shaped by these roles as both a parent and an educator.
This article argues that AI literacy must be treated as a fundamental skill, as important as reading and writing. Philip Colligan, who is the chief executive of the digital education charity The Raspberry Pi Foundation, warns of a possible social divide, which he calls the ‘big split’, where there are AI literates who understand how AI works and can have agency over it, and then those who are AI illiterate, who risk being disempowered by these automated decisions.
The article quotes “Today, three times more people take history, and nearly double the number take biology, chemistry, and physics. At the same time, use of AI systems nationwide has been surging – up 78% in the year to September, according to polling by Ipsos” (Booth, 2025). This is concerning and underscores the importance of teaching digital literacy skills in the classroom. We must ensure that students aren’t merely passively governed by algorithms but instead learn to think critically about the technology shaping their lives. So many decisions are already made for us, such as which movie to watch, which music to listen to, or which restaurant to go to. The article mentions that soon it will be finance, healthcare, and criminal justice decisions. If we don’t understand how those decisions are being made by automated systems, we can’t advocate for our rights. We can’t challenge them or critically evaluate what’s being presented to us.
The article quotes the CEO of the Raspberry Pi Foundation extensively. I have done a bit of research, and it seems this organization develops hardware and curriculum for computing; it is worth considering potential bias. Does their warning of a crisis serve a commercial or institutional interest, as they provide the training and tools to help solve it?
The article suggests that teaching computing will bridge the gap. However, could the divide be deeper, rooted in access to high-speed internet, stable housing, or quality of instruction, which a new curriculum alone cannot fix? This article does not mention any major obstacles that might prevent students from learning these skills.
The POUR principles ensure that digital materials and technologies remain accessible to every learner. While I have always tried to be mindful of accessibility when planning digital experiences for my students, this is my first time intentionally applying the POUR framework. These principles offer an organized approach to inclusion. I have integrated several accessibility features into this blog post to ensure it meets accessibility standards.
References
Booth, R. (2026, January 5). Generation AI: Fears of ‘social divide’ unless all children learn computing skills. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/education/2026/jan/05/generation-ai-fears-of-social-divide-unless-all-children-learn-computing-skills
National Center on Accessible Educational Materials. (n.d.). Understandable: Create an intuitive experience. https://aem.cast.org/create/understandable