I feel like one helpful step would be for all teachers, professors, etc. to include a version of the "invitation" that lays out their own choices pedagogically and is transparent about their reasoning around AI—no matter what it is!
We cannot expect of students what we are not willing to do ourselves as educators, and I do think that would be a very positive step forward. (Into the murkiest of abysses that we're in, admittedly, with no clue of what lies ahead.)
A line I'm going to try this Fall is something like "You are already offloading what you read, watch, and buy to Jeff Bezos, Elon Musk, and Mark Zuckerberg, why do it again now, and offload your thoughts and your voice? What will be left of you?" Critiques are welcome.
I agree with this but am considering taking it further to get students to explore what they are offloading and what it means. Anyone using AI for a particular purpose has to understand that purpose, be able to coach AI towards outputs that are relevant to the purpose and deliver quality. This requires some embodied understanding and skills as well as strong evaluative judgement. It’s not just about AI outputs being biased or incorporating hallucinations. It’s also about AI outputs being overly confident and often mediocre.
How many basketball coaches do we see that have never played a game themselves? Or how many judges in a cooking competition don’t know how to cook? Not many. I’d suggest it’s the same thing with learning.
This is an opportunity for us to really make visible what is at the heart of the things we teach, why it matters and why offloading means they will, at best, be poor mimics of on automation tool.
I think we have to add critical self reflection into the pairing of AI fluency and AI literacy.
In a similar vein, I am having students read part 2 of Warner's More Than Words and having a class discussion about that and learning (I'm not sure about them reading 60 pages, but he's an engaging writer so I'm hopeful). Yes it's a small class. I'm also ungrading, so the only one the students cheat are themselves, out of learning.
This is great! I will be sharing this with my team. Our school has no policy, but I really want something for my classroom. It was nice meeting you and hearing from you at AIDL Tulsa this summer!
isn’t that a problem with advancement and remodeling and improvements? It’s definitely designed to do better without them thinking that anything that is more advanced. It’s definitely bound to have more advanced problems.
To be honest, I think I would still prefer my ChatGPT - 4 and 03 mini. We are intellect and I think we know better so we don’t need a machine giving us 200 messages and bringing more confusion and answers.
I feel like one helpful step would be for all teachers, professors, etc. to include a version of the "invitation" that lays out their own choices pedagogically and is transparent about their reasoning around AI—no matter what it is!
We cannot expect of students what we are not willing to do ourselves as educators, and I do think that would be a very positive step forward. (Into the murkiest of abysses that we're in, admittedly, with no clue of what lies ahead.)
Nice article, especially the different approaches. Per usual, there's no "one size fits all" approach for AI. Also, Lex is awesome!
A line I'm going to try this Fall is something like "You are already offloading what you read, watch, and buy to Jeff Bezos, Elon Musk, and Mark Zuckerberg, why do it again now, and offload your thoughts and your voice? What will be left of you?" Critiques are welcome.
I agree with this but am considering taking it further to get students to explore what they are offloading and what it means. Anyone using AI for a particular purpose has to understand that purpose, be able to coach AI towards outputs that are relevant to the purpose and deliver quality. This requires some embodied understanding and skills as well as strong evaluative judgement. It’s not just about AI outputs being biased or incorporating hallucinations. It’s also about AI outputs being overly confident and often mediocre.
How many basketball coaches do we see that have never played a game themselves? Or how many judges in a cooking competition don’t know how to cook? Not many. I’d suggest it’s the same thing with learning.
This is an opportunity for us to really make visible what is at the heart of the things we teach, why it matters and why offloading means they will, at best, be poor mimics of on automation tool.
I think we have to add critical self reflection into the pairing of AI fluency and AI literacy.
In a similar vein, I am having students read part 2 of Warner's More Than Words and having a class discussion about that and learning (I'm not sure about them reading 60 pages, but he's an engaging writer so I'm hopeful). Yes it's a small class. I'm also ungrading, so the only one the students cheat are themselves, out of learning.
Could you re-share the link to the AI Assignment Assistance Guidelines? The inline link seems to be broken.
I've updated the link in the post and pasted it here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1xqIGYDZdBELKyf1iWZLOesnSx1MQ77FUk0AIHVaGEWc/edit?usp=sharing
This is great! I will be sharing this with my team. Our school has no policy, but I really want something for my classroom. It was nice meeting you and hearing from you at AIDL Tulsa this summer!
isn’t that a problem with advancement and remodeling and improvements? It’s definitely designed to do better without them thinking that anything that is more advanced. It’s definitely bound to have more advanced problems.
To be honest, I think I would still prefer my ChatGPT - 4 and 03 mini. We are intellect and I think we know better so we don’t need a machine giving us 200 messages and bringing more confusion and answers.