For me, it's very much about doubling-down on the the value of "doing" in the classroom—and screaming (to the rooftops) that something is lost when a student (or teacher) takes a shortcut around or past that "doing."
The problem, though, is that this proliferation of shortcuts is colliding head on with an educational landscape that has become increasingly transactional and outcome-oriented, where students are incentivized not to value the "doing" but to find the most efficient path to the outcome that meets their expectations.
As you've noted before, AI isn't the original sin—it's just pouring kerosene on the culture that already exists.
Love this: "My view is that reading and writing are not just of value because they are important precursors to thinking, which then allows us to join in a broader conversation (as Steve Fitzpatrick and I engaged in), but because they are worthwhile experiences, in and of themselves."
I'd love to hear your thoughts on my new post on The Scholarly Kitchen:
Thanks for sharing that link. I agree with all of it. I'm really happy to see people questioning the utility of LLMs by reminding others that humans are much more than just the sum of averages.
For me, it's very much about doubling-down on the the value of "doing" in the classroom—and screaming (to the rooftops) that something is lost when a student (or teacher) takes a shortcut around or past that "doing."
The problem, though, is that this proliferation of shortcuts is colliding head on with an educational landscape that has become increasingly transactional and outcome-oriented, where students are incentivized not to value the "doing" but to find the most efficient path to the outcome that meets their expectations.
As you've noted before, AI isn't the original sin—it's just pouring kerosene on the culture that already exists.
Well said.
Love this: "My view is that reading and writing are not just of value because they are important precursors to thinking, which then allows us to join in a broader conversation (as Steve Fitzpatrick and I engaged in), but because they are worthwhile experiences, in and of themselves."
I'd love to hear your thoughts on my new post on The Scholarly Kitchen:
https://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2025/01/28/guest-post-finding-your-voice-in-a-ventriloquists-world-ai-and-writing/?informz=1&nbd=&nbd_source=informz
I allude to the point you made about losing personality, style, and instead producing uninteresting writing.
Thanks for sharing that link. I agree with all of it. I'm really happy to see people questioning the utility of LLMs by reminding others that humans are much more than just the sum of averages.