OpenAI’s Education Forum was eye-opening for a number of reasons, but the one that stood out the most was Leah Belsky acknowledging what many of us in education had known for nearly two years—the majority of the active weekly users of ChatGPT are students.
Thank you for attending this and recapping it for us, Marc! It's appalling that the majority of ChatGPT users appear to be students and OpenAI is essentially pushing for increased use without any support for students, educators, or schools. Aside from this forum, of course.
It makes me wonder if Sam Altman is serious when he (and others) envision a tutor in every pocket and full privatization of education.
Put another way: I think OpenAI's lack of support for educators is a feature, not a bug.
Quite a move, it seems, to try and shift the conversation towards, "will your institution offer AI access equitably to all your students?"
It skips past the valid questions/concerns being raised about the intersection of AI and education, and also appropriates an equity-driven lens in search of more profit.
(Do I think universities and other academic institutions are going to fall for this? Yes.)
It's such a tricky sales technique: "The technology is here and students are using. Will you pay us to give access to everyone for you. Or are you against equity?"
To the point on school purchasing decisions for otherwise free tools, I know that my institution bought a schoolwide license for Copilot specifically because the education license actually locks out certain features for security reasons and does not train the model based on student inputs. This was the reasoning given to me, at least. Now whether or not students use it for those reasons is an entirely different point, but on the surface it makes sense in the logic of, "If we want to codify using a certain tool, how are we making that decision?". I just was thinking about this as I was reading! Great post.
Boodle AI has an 'education' toggle, Marc. I don't know enough about how it works or what kinds of guardrails they put into each of their toggles, but thought you might like to know about it if you haven't tried it yet!
Getting deeper insights into student performance, learning patterns, and areas of difficulty for personalized feedback, track progress, and highlight where interventions are needed.
Ed should look at how use AI to analyze and improve the learning process itself, ensuring that technology enhances education rather than simplifying or replacing critical thinking.
Is there any chance that AI's Education Forum will recognise the need for converting the existing distorted and pseudo-science of macroeconomics into a truly scientific one? My research and investigative 310-page e-book"Consequential Macroeconomics" could help here, because this change using much more logical methods is some of which I write about. Or it or you could ask me for an e-copy which is for free. chestdher@gmail.com
Thanks for a great summary Marc! The biases at all levels are very real, as is the disconnect. The “tech bros” always do this. I’ve experienced it for decades as the only woman in the room on many occasions. This particular problem is very old and entrenched, and I wish I had a solution.
What worries me even more than the lack of support for HBCU’s is the lack of support for public schools in poorer districts throughout the country. The divide in what used to be free education is growing at an exponential rate thanks in large part to the divide in access to information. Access to information has become as important as access to water, electricity, and roads, i.e. a public utility. This country’s strength was its understanding that education is the great equalizer. When opportunity/education is cloistered, we lose out on a vast swath of people who would otherwise contribute to our economic progress as a whole. Right now, we’re cutting off our nose to spite our face because we see everything as “us vs. them.”
Thank you for attending this and recapping it for us, Marc! It's appalling that the majority of ChatGPT users appear to be students and OpenAI is essentially pushing for increased use without any support for students, educators, or schools. Aside from this forum, of course.
It makes me wonder if Sam Altman is serious when he (and others) envision a tutor in every pocket and full privatization of education.
Put another way: I think OpenAI's lack of support for educators is a feature, not a bug.
Quite a move, it seems, to try and shift the conversation towards, "will your institution offer AI access equitably to all your students?"
It skips past the valid questions/concerns being raised about the intersection of AI and education, and also appropriates an equity-driven lens in search of more profit.
(Do I think universities and other academic institutions are going to fall for this? Yes.)
It's such a tricky sales technique: "The technology is here and students are using. Will you pay us to give access to everyone for you. Or are you against equity?"
To the point on school purchasing decisions for otherwise free tools, I know that my institution bought a schoolwide license for Copilot specifically because the education license actually locks out certain features for security reasons and does not train the model based on student inputs. This was the reasoning given to me, at least. Now whether or not students use it for those reasons is an entirely different point, but on the surface it makes sense in the logic of, "If we want to codify using a certain tool, how are we making that decision?". I just was thinking about this as I was reading! Great post.
I really hope that are not banking on student usage in the future.
They get a lot of student traffic because they were first to market and students know about it.
As soon as I give them an alternative, they’re happy to just use that one and are often happier with it.
I think students will jump ship as soon as they have to pay. Oh…and I asked…many don’t want their colleges to pay for it.
Boodle AI has an 'education' toggle, Marc. I don't know enough about how it works or what kinds of guardrails they put into each of their toggles, but thought you might like to know about it if you haven't tried it yet!
The best use of AI in education is analytics.
Getting deeper insights into student performance, learning patterns, and areas of difficulty for personalized feedback, track progress, and highlight where interventions are needed.
Ed should look at how use AI to analyze and improve the learning process itself, ensuring that technology enhances education rather than simplifying or replacing critical thinking.
Is there any chance that AI's Education Forum will recognise the need for converting the existing distorted and pseudo-science of macroeconomics into a truly scientific one? My research and investigative 310-page e-book"Consequential Macroeconomics" could help here, because this change using much more logical methods is some of which I write about. Or it or you could ask me for an e-copy which is for free. chestdher@gmail.com
Thanks for a great summary Marc! The biases at all levels are very real, as is the disconnect. The “tech bros” always do this. I’ve experienced it for decades as the only woman in the room on many occasions. This particular problem is very old and entrenched, and I wish I had a solution.
What worries me even more than the lack of support for HBCU’s is the lack of support for public schools in poorer districts throughout the country. The divide in what used to be free education is growing at an exponential rate thanks in large part to the divide in access to information. Access to information has become as important as access to water, electricity, and roads, i.e. a public utility. This country’s strength was its understanding that education is the great equalizer. When opportunity/education is cloistered, we lose out on a vast swath of people who would otherwise contribute to our economic progress as a whole. Right now, we’re cutting off our nose to spite our face because we see everything as “us vs. them.”