Tag Archives: learning

Teaching in an era of AI

Yesterday I wrote about Next level artificial intelligence and since then I’ve learned quite a bit about ChatGPT capabilities. It’s an amazing tool and people are catching on, with over 1 million users trying it out in just 6 days. The implications for teaching are huge. Students can use this AI to have original work created for them that will not show up in a Google search if a teacher suspects plagiarism.

For years now I’ve heard the mantra that teachers need to ask questions that you can’t find the answer to on Google. But those questions could be uniquely answered by Chat GPT with no way of a teacher knowing it wasn’t done by a student… other than the fact that the writing might be of a higher quality than usual.

I don’t see Chat GPT completely doing all the work, but it will be a tool students use to build on. For instance, I asked this AI to do the following:

Write a 5 paragraph essay that compares and contrasts Winston Smith in George Orwell’s novel 1984 with Bernard Marx in Aldous Huxley’s novel Brave New World.

This is what it came up with in about 5 seconds:

Winston Smith and Bernard Marx are both characters in dystopian novels, but they have some significant differences. In George Orwell’s 1984, Winston is a rebellious member of a totalitarian society who secretly resists the oppressive government. In contrast, Bernard Marx in Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World is a member of a highly technologically advanced society where the government has complete control over its citizens.

One of the main differences between the two characters is their relationship with their respective governments. Winston is actively opposed to the government, and he goes to great lengths to avoid detection and to resist their control. Bernard, on the other hand, is more accepting of the government’s authority, and he is content to live within the strict societal boundaries set by the ruling class.

Another significant difference is their social status. Winston is a low-ranking member of society who works in the Ministry of Truth. He is not well-liked and is considered an outsider by many of his coworkers. Bernard, on the other hand, is a high-ranking member of society and is considered to be one of the ruling elite. He is well-liked and respected by his peers, and he has access to privileges and luxuries that are not available to the lower classes.

Additionally, the two characters have different views on love and relationships. In 1984, love is considered to be a dangerous emotion that must be suppressed. Winston, however, longs for intimacy and connection, and he ultimately falls in love with Julia despite the risks. In Brave New World, love is viewed as a primitive and outdated concept. Bernard, like many other members of society, is content with superficial relationships and casual sex.

Overall, Winston Smith and Bernard Marx are two characters who live in vastly different societies, and they have different attitudes towards the government and their own social status. While Winston is a rebellious outsider who longs for love and connection, Bernard is a conformist member of the ruling class who is content with the superficial relationships of his society.

Now I don’t think this is a great piece of literature, but I will tell you that the comparing and contrasting that was done offers insights I might not have made if I was writing this essay on my own. This would be a great starting point to a more comprehensive essay… which I could further get Chat GPT to assist me with.

This is a game changer for teaching. The question won’t be how do we stop students from using this, but rather how do we teach students to use this well? Mike Bouliane said in a comment on yesterday’s post, “Interesting post Dave. It seems we need to get better at asking questions, and in articulating them more precisely, just like in real life with people.“

Indeed. The AI isn’t going away, it’s just going to get better. When I asked the question above, I didn’t ask the AI to give specific examples as evidence. That was my first and only attempt. What happens if I iterate a bit more? Add more detail? Put the result back into the AI and ask it to make improvements?

We aren’t going to be able to teach around this tool, so we are probably going to have to teach students when and how to use it. Teaching in the age of very articulate AI is going to have to look different than teaching just a few years ago.

Been there, done that

No you haven’t.

I don’t know why, but I can’t seem to link to this Nov. 12, 2017 post by Alec Couros, or my response on Facebook, so I’ll just share them here. Alec said:

‪”Every “new” revolution or trend in education is inevitably accompanied by the critics who wisely note “We tried this back in the x0’s.

‪If you want change to happen and to stick, engage your historians to better understand why things failed the first time around.”

And I responded:

“When I read this I think of Dweck and growth vs fixed mindset. Yes some things ‘come back’, but there can be innovation (and research) since the last time.

For example, much of the ‘learn at your own pace’ of 20 years ago meant ‘here is the (printed) package of work so that you can move ahead’ (on your own). Now with online resources, discussion forums, YouTube, access to research and experts… that ‘own pace’ can be far more collaborative and richly supported. Even more so in a learning environment that focuses on competencies & skills, rather than content.

So in this, and many other examples, it’s not like ‘we did this back in the day’… it’s fundamentally different. It still warrants critique & criticism when it’s due, but it doesn’t warrant dismissal because ‘we’ve already tried it’.

This is the difference between using old tools and tools that are transformative, tools that allow you to engage differently than you could before. A blog isn’t just a digital version of a paper journal. A blog lets you edit more easily, it lets you spellcheck as you go, it allows you to link to sources and other content. It exposes the writing to more than just the teacher, it invites comments and further conversation. It makes the writer a publisher, who as a result tends to care more about editing and presenting better work.

Back in the days of my high school English classes the only audience my journal writing had were my teachers, except for a poem I had published in our yearbook one year… and I can’t exactly find that in a Google search today.

The next time you try something new and someone says, “We tried this back in the x0’s,” or “Been there, done that,” take a moment to think about what’s different this time before dismissing it as something already tried and abandoned… it might just be significantly different this time around.

—–

Here is the list of 6 suggestions I shared in my post, ‘Transformative or just flashy educational tools?‘ which I linked to above:

So what makes a tool great? Or, a better question than that: What should we do with tools to make them great? Here are some thoughts and feadback is appreciated, this is not an exclusive list!

1.Give students choice.

We don’t assess the tool, we assess the criteria, and we want students to meet specific learning outcomes.We can provide students with a choice of tools or even a choice of projects, and not every student in the class needs to meet the same outcomes in the same way.

2. Give students a voice.

Classroom discussions are great, but how else can we provide students with an opportunity to share? What venues can we provide for them to be heard?

3. Give students an audience.

So often we give students an audience of one… the teacher who marks their work. As a teacher, I told students ‘write to your audience’ but I never truly understood those words until I started blogging. If you want students to write to their audience, then give them a legitimate audience.

4. Give students a place to collaborate.

This comes with a caution: A place to collaborate does not in and of itself create good collaboration. You might be using a great collaboration tool, but do your students know how to collaborate effectively? Do they have specific roles to play? Do they have the skills to learn cooperatively?

5. Give students a place to lead.

Whether it be by choosing a tool, or teaching you a tool, or simply choosing their own topic to study, let your students be the lead learner and even the teacher as often as possible.

6. Give students a digital space to learn.

I’ve talked about blogs as learning spaces. Stephen Downes says, ‘To teach is to model and demonstrate, to learn is to practice and reflect.’Give students a space to practice and reflect that is not limited to the confines of a classroom or notebook, and one that helps them build a community, or rather a network, of teachers and learners.

A tool is just a tool! It’s not the tool, but how you use it that matters.

School 2.0 Participant’s Manifesto

I wrote this on February 5th, 2007. It was one of my early blog posts as I immersed myself in blogging and using Twitter to connect with educators around the world. It was an exciting time to be an educator. New online Web 2.0 tools were coming out all the time: Photo sharing, wikis, live chat boxes on blogs, live video streaming, and many other tools that gave you access to be a creator on the web in ways that were unimaginable just a couple years earlier.

I saw the potential of getting students not just to participate, but to be creators of content on the Brave New World Wide Web.

And I saw the walls of the classroom disappearing:

But it wasn’t just about the web and using these tools. It was about looking at the classroom differently. It was about creating a space where everyone in the community was an active participant. So, without further ado, here is my (15 year old)

School 2.0 Participant’s Manifesto

When I enter our learning space I will be prepared to learn, to participate, to engage, to discover, to play, to inquire, to create.

We are all different. Our opinions are different. We all learn differently. Our learning will be differentiated.

Respect makes all the difference.

We are not all equal, but we must all be ethical, just and fair.

Classes are not rooms; they are learning communities.

Our community will use technology effectively, affectively and appropriately.

Curriculum describes and directs; it is not to be prescribed or directed.

Knowledge is static. Synthesis is dynamic. We create meaning.

Collaboration is a series of learned skills.

Grades are measurements; Rubrics offer feedback.

Self-reflection is mandatory.

When I leave I will be more literate, more resourceful, more involved, more collaborative, more connected, more thoughtful and less willing to accept injustice of any kind.

I will make a positive difference in my world.

Playing with geometry (again)

I’ve already shared that I’m playing with geometry a lot with Joe Truss. We met on Zoom today and talked about living in a ‘Tetraverse’, a universe that is built on the structure of a tetrahedron.

Today we spoke about how this Tetraverse would (and does) affect gravity and wheels spinning on axis. Then I went back to my magnetic ball and rod 8-frequency tetrahedron that I built a few weeks back and played some more. It’s late and I’m not going to try to do a synopsis of the intricate patterns I saw. What I do want to say is that it’s fun to play in a space where I am constantly learning both by being taught and by discovery.

It’s amazing what we can learn through play.

Invisible hold

The things that hold us back the most are usually invisible to other people. It’s a lack of confidence, a crippling amount of self doubt, a hesitation for fear of not being right, or valued, or heard. I see it a lot in students. These internal stressors are portrayed as avoidance, distraction, shyness, hesitation, and even self deprecating humour.

Don’t understand something? “I’m stupid.” Or just pretend to understand to avoid looking stupid.

Treated poorly by a fried? “I deserved it.”

Don’t know where to get started? Just do something else off topic rather than ask for help.

Sometimes it’s not a lack of work, but putting too much in that’s the problem… “It’s not good enough”, “It’s not my best work”, or “It’s not ready”… and all the while it’s better than what most students will submit. Perfectionism is crippling and sometimes “I didn’t try” is easier to face than trying hard and it not being up to par, or knowing just how hard it is to always do great work all the time.

We see a lot of undesirable behaviours, but we don’t see the hidden challenges, the internal struggles, the invisible hold of insecurities that are the root of the behaviours. We see the byproduct of the struggles but not the struggles themselves. Addressing the behaviours does not always address the problem.

This is why it’s important to teach students and not just subjects. Why relationships matter as much as content. Why it takes a village to raise a child. Helping students reduce the hold of their challenges and doubts is as important as any subject we might teach. The best thing we can teach is the wisdom to know themselves, and the confidence to know that they can be and are valued members of our community.

Big rocks

I remember a story about a professor who teaches students about dealing with all the problems and pressures in their lives. He brings a glass jar to class with some sand, pebbles, and slightly larger rocks. He describes these items as all a person’s problems and challenges, and the jar as the person. He tries to put all these items into the jar, starting with the sand, and they don’t fit. Then he starts with the pebbles, and again they don’t fit. Then he starts with the slightly larger pebbles, puts the smaller pebbles in afterwards and shakes the jar so that the smaller pebbles fall between the larger ones, then pours the sand in, which fills the empty spaces. Everything now fits. The lesson is to pay attention and take care of the biggest problems first and you make room to handle all your problems.

I think it’s a neat story, but I never really agreed fully with the message. I don’t think it’s healthy to always be trying to deal with the big problems you face first. Sometimes if you ignore the little problems for too long, they become bigger problems too. “Kill a snake when it’s small,” my grandfather used to say. And sometimes it’s in dealing with smaller issues that the insight comes as to how a larger issue can be solved.

But sometimes it’s easy to avoid the ‘big rocks’ by staying busy tending to smaller issues, and actually avoiding the bigger ones. That’s when the professor’s advice becomes wise. Kill a big snake before its too big to ever deal with… before it’s too big for your jar.

So when do you deal with the big rocks first? I think it’s an upside down bell curve that should drive your attention.

Imagine an attention graph on a scale from not thinking about something at all to always thinking/worry about something. When you are stuck worrying about a problem too much and, on the other extreme, when you are altogether ignoring that problem, that’s when it should be dealt with swiftly, putting aside other smaller issues. But you can’t spend your life only taking care of your big problems and feel like these big rocks are all that matter. No, they should only be a priority when they are bothering you too much, or when you are trying to escape them. At these points it’s time to face the big problems head on.

That doesn’t mean that you ignore them at all other times, it simply helps you determine when they should be the snake you kill… no matter how big it may be.

the spaces in between

I’ve never been to a session at a conference that has taught me more and been more engaging than the ‘spaces in between’ the sessions.

Connecting with distant friends and colleagues; Engaging conversations about teaching, learning, and leading; Topical discussions and meetings over coffee and meals; And getting to know bright people who have similar jobs but unique life and work experience that open my eyes to things beyond what I tend to learn and in my scheduled blocks of conference time… these are the moments that make a conference a rich leaning experience… it’s the spaces in between.

The paradox of pain

It doesn’t matter if it’s physical pain, or simply the pain of doing something uncomfortable or inefficient, I’ve noticed that people prefer old pain to new pain.

Knee hurts, but so do the physiotherapy exercises? Well then the knee pain isn’t so bad.

Doing something that takes a long time to do, but learning the better way to do it is hard work? The long way is ok.

Being told that the system you are currently doing needs to change? Complain about all the ways the new system will be a potential problem, rather than focussing on how it could be better.

People prefer to stay in the pain they know than to be introduced to new pain… even if that pain is lesser than the current pain. The pain of change hurts more than the pain you are in. Except it really doesn’t. That’s the paradox of pain… new pain is always perceived as more painful than the current pain you are in. And so change is resisted, and the old pain persists.

Related: Leading Change, and the follow up Embracing Change on my Pair-a-Dimes blog.

Full STEAM Ahead

Yesterday Dave Sands presented to our teachers and shared the district STEAM initiative with us. He also ensured that the presentation was tailored to our school.

Three concepts that really stuck with me from the presentation and conversations I’ve had with Dave:

1. We are moving from trying to do STEAM education in course silos, to multidisciplinary projects, to ‘transdisciplinary’ – fully integrated STEAM initiatives and perspectives.

And the path to do this is through more inquiry based learning.

2. This isn’t about doing a project and thinking, “Oh, I can add this Math concept here, and this is the way I will tie in Science.” Neither is it about trying to pull out curriculum outcomes from each of the subjects. Instead, this is about doing projects that foster curiosity in these areas and then students needing to delve into these areas to learn and do more.

3. The approach to get students there is through different lenses. A lens provides the opportunity for both teachers and students to approach a project with intention, and allows for a specific line of questioning that makes the connections easier to see and make.

Lenses help students focus on what’s important, and not just get lost in the busywork of the project, without making the necessary connections to the learning.

While I think Inquiry Hub is already focused on multidisciplinary learning, the idea of lenses can help us do this even better, and move us more towards transdisciplinary learning.

Unexpectedly clever

There is no such thing as a perfect worksheet, and students will often read a question and figure out an unintended way to answer it. Here are two clever responses… the difference being the teacher’s assessment.

I look at the first one and I can hear the Madagascar movie version of it in my head. The teacher states the obvious, “Not the answer I was looking for” and gives it a big red X.

It’s obvious in the second one that the answer also wasn’t what the teacher was looking for, but that teacher gave it a big red check mark and a star.

“Not what I was looking for” does not mean wrong.

A clever response may be unexpected, however whether it was an intentional circumvention of the intended outcome or just insightful and clever it deserves to be appreciated rather than marked incorrectly. In my books, both these kids deserve a star.