Writing is my artistic expression. My keyboard is my brush. Words are my medium. My blog is my canvas. And committing to writing daily makes me feel like an artist.
The problem is that often when we should admit we are wrong we double down, we get defensive, we justify with bias.
Double down or learn. We can’t go both.
Although that’s not totally true. We can do both, just not simultaneously. We can double down in the heat of the moment, reflect later, recognize our error, and make amends, admit our error, and hopefully learn.
But learning is a whole lot easier, and less confrontational, when we can admit our error before putting our back up and defending it.
It’s not just better for us, it’s better for everyone around us… and we learn, and grow, and maybe spend a little less time doubling down to defend our errors in the future.
William Ferriter recently shared, “When it Comes to Deadlines, the “Real World” is Far More Flexible than Many Teachers.” And he gives some real world examples to consider, such as his power bill giving him 30 days to pay… and even if he misses that deadline the consequence over the next month is a whopping $1.08! That’s a lot different than giving a zero in an assignment with the excuse that this is a ‘real world’ consequence.
In a comment, I shared how a teacher at my school uses a zero as a potential consequence:
I have one teacher who uses zero’s as a ‘placeholder’ for late work. So for an easy example, in a course where there are only 100 marks given and a kid has 50/60 so far, the kid is at 83%. Now let’s say the kid doesn’t hand in an assignment worth 15% on time. The kid gets a placeholder zero, and the immediate consequence is that the 83% in the gradebook becomes 50/75 or 67%. So the student sees the consequence of not handing in the work! BUT… if the kid hands it in later, and gets 13/15, the mark immediately changes in the gradebook to 63/75 or 84% (no marks off for late). In a course where the gradebook is always visible, this allows the kid to see the potential consequence of a zero/no submission, but provides the opportunity to make it go away completely.
I spent part of my day repairing my hot tub. I had 3 things to do, one of which I did about 2 years ago, the other two I was doing for the first time. In all three cases I did searches on YouTube for ‘how to’ videos. I can’t say that my searches were perfect, and while 2 of the three things only required watching a video, the other took some ingenuity beyond what I watched.
Still, I have to say that this was so much easier than reading complicated manuals or trying to fix with minimal if any instructions. I could have tried AI, but to me this is a YouTube kind of thing. I can honestly say that YouTube has made me far more of a handyman than I’ve ever been capable of doing on my own.
I find it fascinating how resilience works and doesn’t work in different people (including myself). I have met people who have faced incredible challenges and obstacles and they push forward when others would crumble. I have also met others that make a crisis out of every minor challenge they face.
Personally, I have not endured life challenges that I’ve seen others face, from severe disabilities, to tragic abuse or family losses, or drug addiction, or PTSD. And when I see people deal with these challenges with poise, grace, and a positive attitude, I find it inspiring.
But resilience is a tricky thing. It can shine through in one aspect of someone’s life and be absolutely lacking in another. One issue that I might consider small can feel especially large to someone else and vice-versa. A perfect, personal example is that I can get on a stage to deliver a presentation to 1,000 plus people and I’d have no problem. But put me on a stage with only a dozen people watching, and give me ten lines to memorize and act in a scene or a play and I’m a nervous wreck.
The challenge with resilience is in improving it. Some things might seem easy, like for instance, give me only 2 lines to say, and an audience of 4 friends and I could probably build up my resilience to stage freight over time… but I’d hate every minute of it, avoid practicing, and not want to keep trying. Essentially, my lack of resilience will keep me from doing the work I need to do. While this is a simple example, it outlines the challenge, the paradox, of resilience… lack of resilience leads to not working on being resilient, while having resilience fosters more resilience.
We can work to build resilience only as long as there is a willingness to do the work… a willingness to show resilience. That said, it does happen. I see it in the students we teach. Students who feel they can’t, who feel they are ‘too dumb’, who achieve more success than they expect. We can help people be more resilient, but there is a metaphorical line that can sometimes be drawn in the sand, where lack of resilience prevents resilience. And when someone hits that line, they just aren’t ready to grow.
It could be fear of failure. It could be a lack of faith in ability, it could simply be that the small step seems insurmountably large. And yet from the outside looking in it looks fully attainable. Sometimes a cheerleader is all the is needed. Sometimes there is a way to break the challenge down to an even smaller and easier task… and sometimes the lack of resilience is such that the person simply isn’t ready.
It was a simple question asked in a meeting of BC online schools.
“Are we using data to prove or to improve?”
Is it about accountability or improvement? What does the data teach us about our practice? How does it affect our future outcomes and where we focus our support and funding?
What is the real value of collecting data, and how is it best used to inform our practice?
I met two young, gifted students yesterday, interested in attending our school next year. It’s fascinating to meet 13 year old kids who aren’t just good students but passionate learners. Kids who see school as places to connect with friends and get exposed to ideas that they wouldn’t get exposed to if they stayed home. Kids who want to go to school because it’s more interesting than staying home.
It excites me to think that these kids will come to our school and part of their day will be dedicated to them perusing passion projects that they design. They aren’t just going to be taking notes, do practice questions from a textbook, or comple ‘cookie cutter’ styles projects where most of the final products look the same.
I think some kids learn despite the system they are in. These kids I met yesterday would be successful no matter what school they attend. But they deserve an opportunity to attend a school where they get to shine… Where they get to try something that can fully engage their passion for learning. Even where they can try something too big and fail, but learn that this too is a learning experience.
When I see kids with a passion for learning, I see kids that should have some autonomy over their day at school. They want to learn, let them discover, explore, and innovate. Let them follow their passions and interests. Let them own some of their own learning.
I remember my oldest daughter asking me a question when she was just 4 years old. I don’t remember the actual question but I do remember that after I responded, “I don’t know,” she walked over to our desktop computer and asked Google. I remember being surprised that she thought to do this, and amazed because when I was that age, if my parent didn’t know, I might have looked in our Junior Encyclopedia Brittanica, but I probably would have just accepted that I wouldn’t know the answer.
I remember a time, years later, when I would ask a question of my social media network first, rather than Google. Not for a general knowledge question, but for things like how to use a certain tool, such as accessing a feature on a wiki or blogging platform. People were better that generalized Q&A pages at pinpointing the information I was looking for, and I good hashtag on Twitter would put my question in front of the right people.
And now there are times when I would go to YouTube first, before Google, for things like car repair. Don’t know how to get the cover off of a car light to replace it? Simply put your car name and year into YouTube with the information about what bulb you are replacing, and a video will pop up to show you how to do it.
AI is changing this. More and more, questions are being answered right inside of search. Make a query and the answer is not just links to sites that might know the answer, but an actual answer based on information that is on the sites you would normally have to click to. That’s pretty awesome in and of itself… having instant answers to simple questions, without needing to search any further. But what about more complex questions that might require learning something before you can understand all the concepts being shared? What happens when you ask questions with complex learning required?
This is where I see the power of micro-learning. And this term is being redefined by AI. Want to learn a complex concept? AI will do two things for you. First it will curate your learning for you. And secondly it will be adaptive to your learning needs. Want to learn a complex mathematical concept? AI will be your teacher. Got stuck on one particular concept? AI will realize what mistake you are making and change how it teaches you that concept to better meet your leaning needs, and pace.
It’s like having content area specialists at your finger tips. And soon intelligent agents will get to know us. Like a personalized AI tutor, we can pick just about any topic and become knowledgeable by creating small (micro) learning modules that are based on what we know, what we want to know, and how we learn best.
The AI can deliver a lecture, but also ask questions. It can provide the information in a conversation, or it can point us to videos and experts that would normally have taken considerable research to find. And the idea that it can adapt to how quickly you pick something up or if you struggle with a concept, means that you are getting the learning you need, when you need it. Micro-learning with AI is the new search of 2025, and it’s just going to get better and better.
How will this change schools? What will AI assisted lessons look like in classrooms? How will the learning be individualized by teachers? By students? How will this change the way we look at content? How important will the process be compared to the content?
I think this will be a year of experimentation and adaptation. Micro-learning won’t just be something our students do, but our educators as well. Furthermore, what micro-learning means a year from now will look a lot different than it does now. And frankly, I’m excited about the way micro-learning is adapting to the powerful AI tools that are currently being developed. We are headed into a new frontier of adaptive, just-in-time, micro-learning.
At Inquiry Hub we don’t just have genius hour where students spend an hour a week on a project. Instead we have a full for-credit course that students take to follow their learning passions and interests. Yesterday I got to see a couple progress presentations, where students shared where they are on their current learning journey.
I’m always surprised by the diversity of questions students choose to tackle. Students find both creative topics and also creative ways to express their learning. But what I enjoy most is seeing the enthusiasm with which they go about learning. Having a specific course that lets students pursue their interests and actually get credit for it, rather than it be something extra that they do, adds an element of purpose to the project.
Imagine being an inquisitive student who spends their entire day learning what is on someone else’s agenda. Go to class, get the work for that specific subject, then go to the next class and repeat. Then lunch, then repeat for two more courses. The courses could be engaging, the teachers can be fantastic, but the choice of what to study is completely predetermined.
I think genius hour is great when there isn’t a full inquiry course to take. So are assignments where students have choice to make the assignment follow their interests. But maybe students should have inquiry/passion project time every week, at every grade… Scaffolded more in the younger years, but provide to every kid, every week.
Who owns the learning in a school? Who should own it? If you think students should at least partially own their own learning, then at some point in the school day or school week, they should be allotted time to do so. School should be a place where students have a say in what they get to learn.
“Just watched my 5-year-old son chat with ChatGPT advanced voice mode for over 45 minutes.
It started with a question about how cars were made.
It explained it in a way that he could understand.
He started peppering it with questions.
Then he told it about his teacher, and that he was learning to count.
ChatGPT started quizzing him on counting, and egging him on, making it into a game.
He was laughing and having a blast, and it (obviously) never lost patience with him.
I think this is going to be revolutionary. The essentially free, infinitely patient, super genius teacher that calibrates itself perfectly to your kid’s learning style and pace.
Excited about the future.”
– – –
I remember visiting my uncle back when I was in university. The year was somewhere around 1988-90. So, at least 34 years ago. We were talking about the future and Joe Truss explained to me what learning would be like in the coming age of computers.
He said, (loosely paraphrased, this was a long time ago):
‘In the future we will have virtual teachers that will be able to teach us exactly what we want to know in exactly the format we need to learn best. You want to learn about relativity? How about learning from Einstein himself? You’ll see him in front of you like he is real. And he will not just lecture you, he will react to your questions and even bio-feedback. You look puzzled, he might ask a question. He sees you looking up and to the left, which he knows means you are trying to visualize something, and so he changes his lesson to provide an image. He will be a teacher personalized to any and all of your learning needs.’
We aren’t quite there yet, but the exchange Andrew Wilkinson’s son had with ChatGPT, and the work being done in virtual and augmented reality, suggest that Joe’s prediction is finally coming into being.
I too am excited about the future, and more specifically, the future of learning.
There is no doubt that Artificial Intelligence (AI) is going to influence the way we do school in the very near future. I have been pondering what that influence will look like. What are the implications now and what will they be in just a few short years.
Now: AI is going to get messy. Unlike when Google and Wikipedia came out and we were dealing with plagiarism issues, AI writing is not Google-able, and there are two key issues with this: First, you can create assignments that are not Google-able, but you are much more limited in what you can create that is un-AI-able. That is to say, you can ask a question that isn’t easily answerable by Google search, but AI is quite imaginative and creative and can postulate things that a Google search can’t answer, and then share a coherent response. The second issue is that AI detectors are not evidence of cheating. If I find the exact source that was plagiarized, it’s easy to say that a student copied it, but if a detector says that something is 90% likely to be written by AI that doesn’t mean that it’s only 10% likely to be written by a person. For example, I could write that last sentence in 3 different ways and an AI detector would come up with 3 different percentages of likeliness that it is AI. Same sentence, different percentage of likelihood to be AI written, and all written by me.
So we are entering a messy stage of students choosing to use AI to do the work for them, or to help them do the work, or even to discuss that topic and argue with them so that they can come up with their own, better responses. We can all agree that the three uses I shared above are progressively ‘better’ use of AI, but again, all are using AI in some way. The question is, are we going to try to police this, or try to teach appropriate use at the appropriate time? And even when we do this, what do we do when we suspect misuse, but can’t prove it? Do we give full marks and move on? Do we challenge the student? What’s the best approach?
So we are in an era where it is more and more challenging to figure out when a student is misusing AI and we are further challenged with the burden of proof. Do we now start only marking things we see students do in supervised environments? That seems less than ideal. The obvious choice is to be explicit about expectations and to teach good use of AI, and not pretend like we can continue on and expect students not to use it.
The near future: I find the possible direction of use of AI in schools quite exciting to consider. Watch this short video of Sal Hahn and his son, Imran, working with an Open AI tool to solve a Math question without the AI giving away the answer.
When I see something like this video, made almost 6 month ago, I wonder, what’s going to be possible in another couple years? How much will an AI ‘know’ about a student’s approach to learning, about their challenges? About how best to entice learning specifically for each student? And then what is the teacher’s role?
I’m not worried about teachers being redundant, on the contrary, I’m excited about what’s possible in this now era. When 80% of the class is getting exactly the instruction they need to progress to a grade standard in a class on the required content, how much time does a teacher having during class time to meet with and support the other 20% of students who struggle? When a large part part of the curriculum is covered by AI, meeting and challenging students at their ideal points of challenge, and not a whole class moving at the class targeted needs, how much ‘extra’ time is available to do some really interesting experiments or projects? What can be done to take ideas from a course across multiple disciplines and to teach students how to make real-world connections with the work they are studying?
Students generally spend between 5 and 6 hours a day in class at school. If we are ‘covering’ what we need to with AI assistance in less than 3 hours, what does the rest of the time at school look like? Student directed inquiries based on their passions and interests? Real world community connections? Authentic leadership opportunities? Challenges and competitions that force them to be imaginative and creative? The options seem both exciting and endless.
The path from ‘now’ to ‘the near future’ is going to be messy. That said, I’m quite excited about seeing how the journey unfolds. While it won’t be a smooth ride, it will definitely be one that is both a great adventure and one that is headed to a pretty fantastic destination.
_____
Update: Inspired by my podcast conversation with Dean Shareski, here.
