That seems very unlikely based on how ed tech has impacted teaching in the past. It's currently being used to do the opposite while promoting the idea that human teaching can be replaced by software.
Comments
Log in with your Bluesky account to leave a comment
That's fine. I am probably not as negative on this point as you are because I think there are inherent differences with AI, but we will see. I'm already experimenting with accelerating learning and feedback.
But they're not a thought partner. They don't think. What exactly is this tool doing for you? What do you mean when you say it's 'accelerating' your thoughts? How are you using the language it produces?
Disagree with your first point. Agree with your second. They don’t think, but their computational work allows them to reasonably act in that role, ask good questions, challenge assumptions, etc.
Then it is not a thought 'partner', because you are the only one thinking. It is a tool that is spitting out statistically probable language from which you can construct meaning.
You're using software to provide you with feedback on something you are doing? What types of work are you getting feedback on? What types of feedback is it giving you?
But LLMs do a terrible job at all these things, because none of that is what they are designed to do. Why would you use it to do this, when it has no concept of your students and even a novice teacher can create better resources?
Comments