Thanks Anna. And don't beat yourself up if you have sinned, I have too, and in many ways they are unavoidable -- anyone who uses generative AI has to deal with their deficiencies. Meaningfully understanding how these tools work, and why these problems occur, seems to me like the starting point of that journey.
I really appreciate this rubber-meets-the-road take on what AI in Education actually is.
As a classroom teacher I get asked about AI. I like to point at the areas where AI is actually being used AT SCALE: Warfare, Predictive Policing and Social Media. AS Paglayan has a new book out, Raised to Obey, where she demonstrates that compulsory education around the world was originally created for social control. I know it sounds all conspiracy theory and stuff, but I believe that is tacit purpose of AI in Edu. Applying the patterns of the past to the future.
Thanks for the kind words. I just read a blurb on Paglayan's book and it sounds similar to Ivan Illich's theory of "deschooling society." For the record, I'm adamently against that, and very much in favor of "mass" public education, which arose in conjunction with *the idea of democracy*. The broad global spread of literacy, while still imperfect, is testament to the success of our educational endeavor and I'm fighting to preserve and expand it.
When you say you against that doe that mean you are against the theory that the animating purpose of compulsory education was social control or you are against social control as the purpose of education?
Paglayan's book takes a more nuanced POV than most. I particularly appreciated a passage where she contrasted Early Edu reformers Dewey and Thorndike. Where Dewey was interested in the practice of Democracy Thorndike was interested in the indoctrination of Democracy. Dewey lost.
Both the right and the left fight over static political visions of the future. Both offer indoctrination into a fixed future. GenAI is a tool that can only reflect our past into our future. This is antithetical to what Dewey and Freire and Hammond and Betina Love and any other libertory educator understands as education.
The educational revolution the AI companies want involves putting teachers, textbook writers, as well as artists out of business. The tools are trained in stolen words - there are no "ethical" euphemisms that can explain away that underlying fact.
Students deserve better! As do we all. I'm sticking with human intelligence and trusted academic literature.
Towards the end of the piece I link to four examples of asynchronous content that I've found informative on AI-related issues (e.g., AI safety, how artificial neural networks function, and how LLMs produce their output). If your question is more along the lines of "what's a good asynchronous online course to help educators understand how to use AI?" I haven't found one. Perhaps because that's a bad way to learn something important.
Yes, I saw that. Yes, asynchronous is very difficult to pull off well. I teamed up with an instructional designer named Richard Andrew and we are exploring a more collaborative, reflective mode of continuing professional education: https://pragmaticaicommunity.sutra.co
But I was mostly interested in other ideas for these in-person trainings. You are right. They are a little formulaic, and yet to folks who maybe haven’t had the luxury of sitting in on a bunch of them or analyzing them for a Substack post, they provide a good launchpad for deeper exploration.
The challenge always is… How to use the gift of 2 hours of other educators’ time?
I personally try to put educators in front of tools as quickly as possible. But I have a Montessori background and am a little more accepting of chaos in a group training setting.
Yes, it's on my radar but I haven't taken the course yet -- thanks for the nudge, I just signed up. I also may write about Mollick's role in the AI ecosystem at some point, my feelings are...complicated. But I'd agree that he actually rolls up his sleeves and uses these tools, which is to his credit.
This is fantastic. It came at a great time as I prepare to present on Friday. This is a great resource that I will link for the audience.
This is invaluable! And I love your title... I'll have to do some soul-searching on whether I've been guilty of any of these sins...
Thanks Anna. And don't beat yourself up if you have sinned, I have too, and in many ways they are unavoidable -- anyone who uses generative AI has to deal with their deficiencies. Meaningfully understanding how these tools work, and why these problems occur, seems to me like the starting point of that journey.
You nailed it. Fantastic piece that clearly demonstrates the problematic common threads between these "courses."
Thought you'd like this one, Tom.
Yes. Some serious Tom Mullaney catnip here.
I really appreciate this rubber-meets-the-road take on what AI in Education actually is.
As a classroom teacher I get asked about AI. I like to point at the areas where AI is actually being used AT SCALE: Warfare, Predictive Policing and Social Media. AS Paglayan has a new book out, Raised to Obey, where she demonstrates that compulsory education around the world was originally created for social control. I know it sounds all conspiracy theory and stuff, but I believe that is tacit purpose of AI in Edu. Applying the patterns of the past to the future.
Thanks for the kind words. I just read a blurb on Paglayan's book and it sounds similar to Ivan Illich's theory of "deschooling society." For the record, I'm adamently against that, and very much in favor of "mass" public education, which arose in conjunction with *the idea of democracy*. The broad global spread of literacy, while still imperfect, is testament to the success of our educational endeavor and I'm fighting to preserve and expand it.
When you say you against that doe that mean you are against the theory that the animating purpose of compulsory education was social control or you are against social control as the purpose of education?
Both! On the former question, I recommend Democracy's Schools by Johann Neem.
I will take a look. Thank you.
Paglayan's book takes a more nuanced POV than most. I particularly appreciated a passage where she contrasted Early Edu reformers Dewey and Thorndike. Where Dewey was interested in the practice of Democracy Thorndike was interested in the indoctrination of Democracy. Dewey lost.
Both the right and the left fight over static political visions of the future. Both offer indoctrination into a fixed future. GenAI is a tool that can only reflect our past into our future. This is antithetical to what Dewey and Freire and Hammond and Betina Love and any other libertory educator understands as education.
The educational revolution the AI companies want involves putting teachers, textbook writers, as well as artists out of business. The tools are trained in stolen words - there are no "ethical" euphemisms that can explain away that underlying fact.
Students deserve better! As do we all. I'm sticking with human intelligence and trusted academic literature.
Humans hallucinate and invent quotes too. You just did:
Google: “ultimately meaningless”
Ben: responses that are “utterly meaningless.”
Just saying…
What alternatives do you suggest?
Towards the end of the piece I link to four examples of asynchronous content that I've found informative on AI-related issues (e.g., AI safety, how artificial neural networks function, and how LLMs produce their output). If your question is more along the lines of "what's a good asynchronous online course to help educators understand how to use AI?" I haven't found one. Perhaps because that's a bad way to learn something important.
Yes, I saw that. Yes, asynchronous is very difficult to pull off well. I teamed up with an instructional designer named Richard Andrew and we are exploring a more collaborative, reflective mode of continuing professional education: https://pragmaticaicommunity.sutra.co
But I was mostly interested in other ideas for these in-person trainings. You are right. They are a little formulaic, and yet to folks who maybe haven’t had the luxury of sitting in on a bunch of them or analyzing them for a Substack post, they provide a good launchpad for deeper exploration.
The challenge always is… How to use the gift of 2 hours of other educators’ time?
I personally try to put educators in front of tools as quickly as possible. But I have a Montessori background and am a little more accepting of chaos in a group training setting.
Interested if you've seen https://www.coursera.org/learn/wharton-ai-in-education-leveraging-chatgpt-for-teaching ... I think Ethan Mollick is pretty pragmatic about testing AI use in education but I'm not an expert!
Yes, it's on my radar but I haven't taken the course yet -- thanks for the nudge, I just signed up. I also may write about Mollick's role in the AI ecosystem at some point, my feelings are...complicated. But I'd agree that he actually rolls up his sleeves and uses these tools, which is to his credit.