STEM Needs Civics, Too

Last month, the University System of Georgia Board of Regents approved the charter for a new Institute for Technology and Civic Leadership at Georgia Tech. The Institute could be the beginning of a new opportunity for the civic life movement: STEM universities.

Unlike its predecessors, Georgia Tech’s new institute incorporates the study of technology into its civics mission. According to its charter, the Institute for Technology and Civic Leadership aims to “develop and support civic-minded technological leaders and policy-aware innovators—equipping them to lead in a pluralistic constitutional republic and an interconnected, innovation-driven world.” One of the major components of the institute will be “An innovation, technology, policy, and business center—a nonpartisan, multi-stakeholder solutions accelerator and think tank.”

This is an extension of the already interdisciplinary nature of civics programs. In extant civics schools and institutes across the country, humanities and social science scholars fill the faculty ranks, teaching courses such as “Pursuing the Good Life,” “Statesmanship and American Grand Strategy,” and “Foundations of American Civic Life.” As yet, few of the courses feature scientific instruction. Georgia Tech’s new program will fill that niche.

In an interview with the Martin Center, University System of Georgia board member Harold Reynolds described the new program at Georgia Tech as “the right time and the right place for this type of innovation.”

With AI now significantly affecting education, work, and culture, the country needs scholars and leaders who understand both how it works and how it affects society. A new report by Stanford University’s Human-Centered Artificial Intelligence program found that most AI ethics teams are ineffective. “Because tech industry ethics teams lack resources and authority, their effectiveness is spotty at best, according to a new study,” writes Katharine Miller. There have also been complaints that current university-based AI education lacks any ethics component.

Simply put, society needs the creators, users, and regulators of future technologies to be not just savvy but wise. Our current learning model, with its distinct silos between the humanities and STEM, serves no one well.

Reynolds added, “AI and quantum computing are raising concerns with the public. How will it challenge our individual rights? Technology doesn’t have morals and ethos. People do. A place like Georgia Tech can address those concerns, bringing together our civic values with STEM expertise.”

Georgia Tech’s new Institute can be a model to help other STEM schools produce students who are wise users, creators, and regulators of emerging technologies. The Institute’s work “will be informed by open debate, scientific inquiry, an evidence-based approach to addressing complex issues, and civic responsibility.” These are precisely the skills and dispositions leaders need to confront the new technologies shaping and reshaping the United States. 

Reynolds explained, “When we took the idea to Governor Kemp for potential seed funding, he understood right away that this institute would offer a real benefit for policymakers who are dealing with technology issues that are politically charged. It’s nothing new that people are afraid of new technologies. This will be a place to go where ideas are being fleshed out, so policy makers and others can get facts.”

Our future technology leaders need training in both science and the humanities. They need STEM knowledge, pro-social habits, and deep wisdom. Georgia Tech is pioneering a model that can help us get there. 

Jenna Robinson is president of the James G. Martin Center for Academic Renewal.