-
Click here to listen to this article - Share via
See more from the L.A. Times in Google Search. Set us as preferred
Not long ago, a student at my school forgot to submit a homework assignment. Before the school day even began, my colleague received an email from the parent — to ask if they could upload the assignment on the student’s behalf. The student was 17 years old.
We are in the midst of a parenting and educational crisis. Students are increasingly shielded from discomfort, failure and responsibility. As a result, they’re entering adulthood anxious, incredibly risk-averse and ill-prepared to face life’s inevitable challenges.
Now, with artificial intelligence offering instant shortcuts around thinking, writing and problem-solving, we risk raising a generation even more disconnected from creativity, resilience and independent thought.
Many parenting and educational norms, though well-intentioned, have shifted toward overprotection and hyper-management. The typical childhood once was “free range,” full of unstructured play, conflict resolution and hard-earned independence. Now, it’s often a carefully curated experience dominated by adult intervention. Helicopter parenting has evolved into “snowplow parenting,” in which parents proactively remove any obstacle in their child’s path. A recent survey found that 75% of parents remind their children of school deadlines, and 16% of parents of college students admit to waking their children up for class. These behaviors rob young people of essential life skills.
As educators, we see the downstream effects: students who fear failure, lack initiative, and turn to adults to manage even minor problems. Professors report students calling parents to negotiate grades. Employers describe young hires who can’t make independent decisions without excessive guidance. The ability to cope with and endure discomfort, once considered a basic developmental milestone, is rapidly eroding.
Now, another force threatens to accelerate this trend: artificial intelligence. As AI becomes increasingly integrated into classrooms and everyday life, students may feel even less inclined to engage in creative thinking or struggle through complex problems. Why wrestle with a blank page when an AI tool can write the essay? Why brainstorm ideas when algorithms can generate solutions in seconds?
Although AI holds promise as a tool to support learning, it also poses real risks to student growth. Creativity, originality and perseverance — the very skills that will set students apart in an AI-driven economy — require practice. They require friction. And friction requires failure. If students are not equipped with the internal motivation and emotional resilience to persist through difficult tasks, AI will become a shortcut that further stifles rather than supports growth, much like snowplow parenting.
This makes the role of schools even more urgent. We must resist the pressure to treat students and families like customers, catering to short-term satisfaction rather than long-term development. Instead, we must reclaim our position as experts not only in academics but also in character formation.
As educators at a private school here in Los Angeles, my colleagues and I strive to prioritize self-advocacy, independence and student-led initiatives. We create intentional opportunities for students to face intellectual, social and emotional challenges and to grow through them. We don’t shield students from failure; we guide them through it, helping to teach and model for them the “how” of grit and resilience. That’s where real enlightenment happens.
While schools nationwide agonize about AI, I fear many in the profession are missing the bigger picture. The risk this technology poses to students is not so new; it is fundamentally the same risk that overweening parents have posed for a generation or more. It is the risk of leaving students unprepared and, in the most basic sense, uneducated.
As educators we must stop trying to solve every student’s problem. We must stop responding to every parental concern with concession. Instead, we must build school cultures that promote grit, curiosity and independent thought — the very things AI cannot replicate.
And we need parents as partners. That means encouraging their children to make mistakes, to learn from them and take responsibility for them, and to recover on their own. It means modeling how to handle setbacks and uncertainty with maturity and resilience. And it means trusting educators to challenge students in ways that foster these important qualities.
The goal at school is not to make life easier for students. It is to prepare them to be successful in a life that won’t always be easy. That requires a cultural shift away from overprotection and instant solutions and toward discomfort, struggle and growth.
Our children’s future will be shaped by rapid change, automation and technological disruption. Confronting this reality will demand adaptability, creativity and emotional fortitude. These qualities cannot be offloaded to AI. They must be nurtured and developed.
So let students fail. Let them struggle. Let them grow.
Mark Shpall is head of school at de Toledo High School in West Hills.
Insights
L.A. Times Insights delivers AI-generated analysis on Voices content to offer all points of view. Insights does not appear on any news articles.
Viewpoint
Perspectives
The following AI-generated content is powered by Perplexity. The Los Angeles Times editorial staff does not create or edit the content.
Ideas expressed in the piece
The article argues that contemporary parenting has shifted from a more “free range” approach to overparenting and “snowplow parenting,” in which adults preemptively remove obstacles like missed assignments or difficult situations, depriving teens of chances to solve problems independently.[9][11][13][17] Research on overparenting similarly links high parental control and reduced autonomy to lower resilience, heightened anxiety and stress, and weaker life skills in college-age students.[6][9][10][15]
The piece contends that artificial intelligence risks becoming a new form of overprotection, offering instant answers and completed work that allow students to bypass the discomfort of thinking, writing and struggling through complex tasks.[1][2][5] Reports and studies cited by educators indicate that heavy reliance on AI tools can erode critical thinking, creativity, and knowledge retention, reinforcing the very fragility and risk-aversion already seen in overparented youth.[1][2][5]
The column suggests that schools are under pressure to treat families as customers, prioritizing convenience and short-term satisfaction, and that this dynamic encourages educators to smooth away students’ difficulties rather than foster perseverance.[1][2][3] Scholarship on overparenting echoes this concern, finding that when adults consistently lower demands and intervene to secure success, students develop less responsibility, self-efficacy, and capacity to cope with setbacks.[9][11][12]
The article argues that educators should intentionally create situations where students must advocate for themselves, tolerate discomfort, and learn from failure, with adults guiding rather than fixing problems.[7][11][12] Expert advice on avoiding snowplow parenting similarly emphasizes allowing natural consequences, promoting independent decision-making, and coaching children through challenges so they build resilience instead of expecting adults to intervene.[11][12][14][16]
The piece suggests that parents must become partners in this effort by resisting the urge to micromanage, encouraging children to own their mistakes, and modeling mature responses to uncertainty and hardship.[8][11][12] Parenting resources and psychological guidance frequently stress that stepping back—while still offering emotional support—helps adolescents develop coping skills, confidence, and the ability to navigate the inevitable difficulties of adult life.[7][8][11][12][14]
Finally, the article maintains that the qualities students will need in a rapidly changing, AI-rich world—adaptability, creativity, curiosity, and emotional fortitude—cannot be outsourced to technology and must be deliberately cultivated through struggle and growth.[2][3][5] Commentaries on AI in education likewise note that while algorithms can personalize content or automate tasks, they cannot replace the human work of character formation, nor the social-emotional learning that comes from grappling with failure and ambiguity.[2][3][5]
Different views on the topic
In contrast, some education researchers highlight the significant potential benefits of AI in classrooms, arguing that well-designed tools can personalize instruction, provide immediate feedback, and support diverse learners, including those who struggle in traditional settings.[2][3][5] These perspectives suggest that when integrated thoughtfully, AI can deepen engagement and help students master material more efficiently, rather than simply offering shortcuts around effort.[2][3][5]
Technology and policy experts often advocate comprehensive AI literacy for both teachers and students, contending that the core challenge is not AI itself but how it is used.[1][2][3] From this viewpoint, students should learn to interrogate AI outputs, treat the technology as a collaborator, and develop metacognitive skills, so that interaction with AI becomes a practice ground for critical thinking instead of a route to cognitive decline.[1][2][3]
Child-development specialists also caution against equating all intensive parenting with harmful “snowplow” behavior, noting that appropriate guidance and advocacy can be crucial for children facing disabilities, learning differences, or significant mental health concerns.[7][8][11][12] These experts argue that structured support, clear boundaries, and proactive communication with schools can protect vulnerable students and improve outcomes without necessarily undermining independence.[7][8][11][12]
Some psychologists and parenting counselors promote a nuanced model of involvement in which adults initially provide scaffolding—helping teens plan, reflect, and problem-solve—while gradually stepping back as competence grows.[7][8][11][14] This approach challenges the idea that parental assistance inherently stunts resilience, instead framing calibrated help and coaching as a path to stronger self-regulation and decision-making skills.[7][8][11][14]
Educators and ethicists concerned with AI also point to systemic issues that the article touches on only indirectly, such as unequal access to technology, data privacy risks, and algorithmic bias that can deepen existing educational inequities.[2][3][4] From this perspective, focusing primarily on overparenting and individual student grit may obscure the need for broader reforms—better funding, teacher training, and regulation—to ensure AI serves all students fairly and safely.[1][2][3][4]
Additionally, some commentators warn against overly romanticizing struggle, arguing that not all forms of difficulty are educational and that repeated failure without sufficient support can harm motivation and mental health.[6][10][15] These voices maintain that the goal should be “desirable difficulties” calibrated to a student’s developmental stage, with adults balancing opportunities for challenge against the genuine risks of burnout, anxiety, and disengagement.[6][9][10][15]
More From the Los Angeles Times
Podcasts
Kim, an attorney and former San Francisco supervisor, is running against State Sen. Benjamin Allen for the role of running California’s long-beleaguered Department of Insurance. In this episode she talks to Rebuilding L.A. host Kate Cagle about why she should get the job.
The Hillside Strangler murders terrorized Los Angeles in the late 1970s. The killers were a pair of sadistic cousins. One confessed. The other was set to stand trial—until L.A. prosecutors flinched.
Modern LA earned its first smoggy nickname 450 years ago, as the “bay of smokes.” At the La Brea tar pits, we take a short walk through a long history with curator Regan Dunn, who explains how and why the first Angelenos would have set fires that filled the broad bowl of LA and foretold the curse of smog.
