Personalized learning only helps if the information is correct. AI systems still hallucinate, make reasoning mistakes, and confidently provide incorrect answers. A student without enough background knowledge may not even realize when the AI is wrong or that it even IS wrong. AI can measure learning yes, but teachers shape those learners. Tracking mistakes isn't the same as understanding the person that makes those mistakes.

I see where your coming from, but your beginning to compare isolated human mistakes to a completely different issue entirely. A teacher getting a single fact wrong is still using reasoning, context, and decades of subject knowledge. AI simply doesn't make occasional factual errors, it can confidently fabricate sources, quotes, citations, and explanations without recognizing they're false. Also, updating yhe model later doesn't help that student who learned the wrong information already. The relevant question, instead, isn't whether teachers are perfect because they aren't, instead it's which system is more reliable at distinguishing that truth from falsehood in that exact moment. Your claim that AI can simply "flag uncertainty is assuming it always knows when it's uncertain. That's the exact weakness critics of AI replacing teachers points out: AI often presents flase information with complete confidence. If students already know enough to verify whether AI is right, then they really don't need AI to teach them the material in the first place. And if they don't know enough to check it, they're vulnerable to accepting convincing mistakes. Them saying "let's look it up together" still requires an independent, trustworthy source, not the actual AI itself. Finally, to reduce teaching to being "adaptable, patient, and data-driven" ignores what education actually involves.Great teachers don't just deliver information, they read body language, build trust, inspire curiousity, manage classroom dynamics, recognize emotional struggles, and mentor students as people. Those aren't simply biological limitations to be removed. Those are human strengths which shape how students learn. AI is a powerful education tool, but replacing teachers assumes education is only about transferring facts and not about developing judgement, character, and critical thinking.

Yes, that teacher doesn't purposefully get information wrong and do so with confidence. And I hold the belief that MANY classrooms hold those teachers. I'll give a couple of examples, my 10th Grade Honors World History Teacher ALWAYS put in effort to make his lessons engaging. My 11th Grade Honors Math III teacher always engaged with the class, and it didn't matter if those two men were tired or if they were sick, they always made an effort to show up. According to the National Center for Education Statistics, average US public school sizes had remained relatively stable over decades. It's really not. AI can't know when it's uncertain. Especially AI like ChatGPT, which has an overall message saying it has no inherit live awareness of current information UNLESS explicitly connected to tools. Third-party sources, not the AI itself. You mentioned that AI flags its own doubts, can you give me one example of that being true? AI really IS competing with that teacher. The AI, instead of feeding her up-to-date and accurate information, it feeds her information which could be out of date or straight up inaccurate.