Day 109 (of 2025/26) #tEChursdAI I am a fan of what AI is doing to schools (and with Learning) inspired by many
Been reading a lot of thoughtful pieces. And when thinking about AI, I am influenced by wondering if AI, like androids, dream of electric sheep, but more likely AI remains a library book that opens when someone turns the page… for now… and to do differently: citing my sources at the start…. And then giving a spoiler
Dean Shareski “I do not regard myself an as AI enthusiast, nor as a AI hater” – read this from Gary Marcus: https://open.substack.com/pub/garymarcus/p/about-that-matt-shumer-post-that?utm_campaign=post-expanded-share&utm_medium=web pointing out some errors/assumptions based on Shumer’s famous post about AI taking over everything – there are errors made by AI… sometimes Claude is the worst coworker… LLMs are coding more, but they’re only… human(?) in what they can do (for now…)
Gary Stager https://reggio.constructingmodernknowledge.com/labubu AI is different, but the system likes to do as the system has…
Vanessa Andreotti – of course Hospicing Modernity… and Burnout from Humans https://burnoutfromhumans.net/about … but more recently navigating systemic unravelling: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1h46xx53mmZ6_ETOicrg8Y8X14j3lbUg_9wOnkst8l-8/edit?tab=t.0#heading=h.aeyb4d27f5xt
Alec Couros https://couros.substack.com?utm_source=navbar&utm_medium=web Is AI and LMMs providing seductive logic that it can do the writing for/of/as humanity?
Marcus Blair: Centering the User. Not the Usage… https://www.linkedin.com/posts/marcus-blair-b07088103_here-are-the-slides-in-video-format-from-ugcPost-7428244501980160001-22T4?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_desktop&rcm=ACoAABZNptIBuMettSFB5rSK4pFTltY83fhN9vo
Stacie Chana: Book Experimenting with AI is the anchor to our school AI PLC… https://www.linkedin.com/posts/drstaciechana_experimenting-with-ai-activity-7386447280276631552-M5Z8?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_desktop&rcm=ACoAABZNptIBuMettSFB5rSK4pFTltY83fhN9vo
Will Richardson https://www.linkedin.com/posts/willrichardson1_if-youre-an-educator-you-need-to-read-this-activity-7427724344476270592-MuSK?utm_medium=ios_app&rcm=ACoAABZNptIBuMettSFB5rSK4pFTltY83fhN9vo&utm_source=social_share_send&utm_campaign=copy_link with a shoutout to Matt Shumer
Spoilers:
The Good:
AI compresses the distance between attempt and improvement.
The Bad:
AI is exposing cracks that were already there.
The Ugly:
The real cost of AI is not electricity. It is institutional inertia.
The Writing:
I’m an AI fan, but am also caution-aware… I believe in Occam’s Razor and my view is we are either on the thin razor between a utopian or dystopian future… or that both may be true, just depending on your particular point of view and perspective…
But believe firmly that AI is not a ‘fad’, but a paradigm shift in what/why/how/when/etc we do what we do in/of/as/with learning. At last weeks Pro-D, a teacher said something that hasn’t left me.
“If my students used AI constantly, they’d finish the course quickly.
But I’m not sure what they’d learn.”
That comment isn’t about AI. It’s about school.
AI is not a ‘killer app’ – it is fundamentally changing the ‘why’ we do things, as well as the ‘how’, while making of us wonder about the what/where/when… in real time. What I am writing now is outdated by the time I hit publish… even more so than the textbooks many yearn for that are likewise outdated by the time they are printed… more so by the time they are shipped… even more so by the time their spines are cracked for the first time, let alone the leventy-leventh time…
AI is immersed in society… not ‘going to be’, but acknowledging “is” and “has been for awhile”. It is just now that we are paying more attention to it, and I also wonder if we are thinking differently now that AI is doing more work into areas that we thought were ‘uniquely human’ which makes us question what is ‘humanity’ – if our future robot overlords can create written material better organized and more clearly articulated than most of us can… and in a much more efficient period of time – similar to how calculators have done similar, but with a global acceptance that “math is hard/not for everyone” acknowledging that calculators helped deal with the minutia so that our brains could ponder greater calculations… which I think is very valid… thus, perhaps by taking away some of the stress of written output (has anyone matched the essay writing of the apex of this form of showing ones knowing that I modestly propose happened in 1729?) mayhaps we can better synthesize and ponder thoughts without worrying about rhythm and metre of prose, and spend more time with poetry (metaphor here folks!)
Sure, some aspects are scary – Ring doorbells have been credited with finding people and animals https://apple.news/AIOqb3q6_TfiJV7g-ar_a6g but…likely not the end of what can be crowd sourced/viewed… what if our AI collaborator decides to focus on our health and starts monitoring and approving what can and cannot be purchased for dinner – oversight of both the bank card/account and the purchasing app/atm… as already ‘social credit’ experiments could influence how much that flight will cost you based on if you littered vs picked up litter…
I’ve also been enjoying going along with the theme using the old Eastwood film…
AI: The Good, The Bad, The Ugly…
I do think there is more good than bad when it comes to education, though admittedly uncomfortable as we consider and contemplate this latest evolution of technology to augment learning (possibly at the cost of schooling….)
Three things I like to focus on as the good:
- Always-on tutor – stuck on a word? A starting? An ending? The more you work with an AI collaborator (this word is chosen mindfully – google is a tool; search engine is on when trying to calculate an answer; AI contemplates things more broadly… and continues to get better: a) with each iteration, and b) the more it gets to know you – the partnership matters
- Synthesis and Organization. Some of us get a little stuck in our ideas… Most LLM AI’s are GREAT at creating organization of random thoughts and synthesizing how particular creations will be received (spoiler: the 5 paragraph essay of 5 sentences reads VERY robotic and mechanical…)
- Non judgmental feedback – on-demand. Instead of waiting for a day, a week, (more for my students…. ) feedback can be geared towards either being supportive and strength based, or critical and editorial. And as-needed based on who the student is: multilingual students can check translations; anxious learners can practice, executive function supports for braking down assignments; helping generate study guides and quizzes for that one teacher who still thinks multiple choice responses are great, but doesn’t norm-reference, field test, nor identify the distractors (why each response may be selected) to better give feedback to themselves for further instruction or to the learner for what trips them up…
Two things that I have paid attention to as the bad:
- the system we currently use is showing more and more cracks … if the pushback to what we have learned about neurology and blended with technology is reverting back to more textbooks and more 17th century prose (essays) as ‘the’ way to show what one knows… ugh – admittedly this ‘bad’ may be more uncomfortable..
- are we going to be okay with a rethink of what we do and how we do teaching… there are going to be some uncomfortable ‘what ifs’ – a year-ish ago I teased a ponder if the ‘fad of reading’ was finally coming to an end… https://technolandy.com/2024/12/09/day-67-of-2024-25-maybe-this-reading-words-fad-has-run-its-course-to-read-or-not-to-read-op-ed-for-theatlantic-and-edutopia-to-consider/ But now I am spending some energy wondering if we ought to de-emphasize the need for everyone to exclusively do their own written output and maybe, much as we use calculators to do the mundane so that we can get into the more interesting thinking/reflecting/sharing/etc of ideas… maybe instead of struggling for 10 minutes to compose a sentence, we rely a bit more on our collaborator – knowing that means that reading fad becomes even more important of a skill…. Though AI could help generate videos and PowerPoints likewise faster and more period-accurate than what most people tend to be able to do
*disclaimer – a lot of this hurts my librarian heart… and as influenced by my father who was a principal when BCs “Educated Citizen” was first getting curated… philosophically I like the idea of being a ‘renaissance learner’ and having knowledge in a lot of different areas (though I did drop physics and don’t have many fond memories of the science classes I had to endure) I am also aware that neurology knowledge has grown over the decades and what makes sense now is different(iated). Many will benefit from their wide spread 80 credits of a graduation journey…. Many are also going to opt out because that metaphorical orchestra doesn’t jive with the jazz playing in their minds… and I believe in everyone learning the maths, how to read, how to write… but this can be more personalized… but I think we also need to spend more time teaching about things the world needs now – and climate is just #1 on the list – not the only ‘one’ item….
Thus…
The ugly.
- Are we okay with the costs. There is significant energy and water drains going on to maintain the AI infrastructure. AskJeeves is cheap – collaboration costs add up… and then there is the ‘what’s next’? Are we okay knowing that we are currently preparing students for the world outside the classroom and school – where we prefer to ban and stay significantly more conservative than the real world is moving…? Reading and talking with more students who are asking bigger questions about the role of current schooling and what the point of it really is…. With climate concerns being real, but also employment… what jobs are we preparing students for? Is the auto program focused on working with hybrid and electronic components as well as brake pads? Are we aware of the number of recent grads who went into elite programs are finding themselves already considering a career pivot? I read a bit of hate online questioning the degree of someone who had ‘excellent grades and references, 1000 applications, and 10 interviews’ with someone wondering if their degree was in lesbian photography (I am not kidding here)… I had to point out that honestly, that degree is probably one of the more AI resilient as the Arts are going to find audiences – live performances remain delightful and have their niche and mainstream audiences (as I recently saw Off Menus Gamble & Acaster on separate nights!) but coding jobs are shifting to current workers doing more while collaborating with AI… and while AI isn’t batting 100% on what it creates… it’s getting better each…. Month? Week? Faster than we want to admit? The cost is change and I don’t think it’s a bill that we can pretend doesn’t exist.
And yes, I am mindful that this last jumble of words coulda been much better with an editor… here it is:
Are we fully considering the costs of our current approach to artificial intelligence?
The infrastructure that sustains AI systems requires significant energy and water resources. While individual tools may appear inexpensive, large-scale collaboration and enterprise integration introduce substantial cumulative costs. Beyond infrastructure, there is a deeper question: what comes next?
We say we are preparing students for the world beyond school. Yet in many cases, educational systems are adopting more restrictive and conservative approaches to AI than the environments students will actually enter. This tension is not lost on them. Increasingly, students are asking fundamental questions about the purpose of schooling, particularly in light of climate concerns and shifting employment landscapes.
What careers are we truly preparing students for? Are our automotive programs fully aligned with hybrid and electric vehicle technologies, or are they primarily focused on traditional mechanical systems? Are we tracking the number of recent graduates from elite programs who are already contemplating career pivots?
Public discourse around degrees and employability has grown sharper, and at times dismissive. Yet creative fields, often undervalued, may prove more resilient in an AI-augmented economy. The arts continue to attract audiences, and live performance retains both niche and mainstream appeal. Meanwhile, coding and technical roles are evolving rapidly, with professionals increasingly collaborating with AI systems that are improving at a pace difficult to ignore.
AI is not flawless. But its rate of advancement is accelerating month by month, perhaps even week by week.
The real cost before us is change. And it is a bill we cannot afford to ignore.
Final Highlight… the collaboration…
If we do things right – this is going to be an amazing era for teachers and students by finding that most valuable resource: time
Teacher Time Reallocation
When AI collaborates:
• Parent communication templates gets streamlined
• IEP scaffolds and personalizations
• Assessment variations both for PBL or for those who ‘like tests’
• Differentiated reading levels but using the same reading for grand discssion
• Brainstorm lists – and organize them… and prompt, not provide answers
Teachers can spend more time:
• Conferencing – with students
• Observing – interactions and performances
• Designing – personalized/individualized ‘next steps’
• Coaching – giving the right instruction when Vygotsky’s Zone of Proximal Development emerges
In lived reality, this can be huge. But not if we ban it outside of the school walls for kids to try to figure it out on their own – because they will… and unlike the elite who could afford to keep this type of support for their children, and not all children… the playing field gets levelled… not doomscrolled…
There is a curse I keep hearing in my head: may you live in interesting times… and today is getting very interesting!
Technolandy 
Leave a comment