As always, Tom, a masterful analysis and context-setting.
You often wind up on the topic of education. What new context are we in when a middle schooler can use AI to write like Steinbeck? In the AI dominated future, what will we mean by the term “labor?” “Worker?” “work?”
How much of your policy proscriptions are based on a pre-AI paradigm defining the individual’s relationship to the State and the economy?
A handful of school districts are experimenting with different ways to more fully integrate technology into classrooms, using AI and other advances to create curricula that are better tailored to each student. Consider, for example, how nearly every child today from an early age accesses information - online. But when they get to school, most of the time is spent in the same environment you and I experienced in our long-ago youth. Perhaps the blackboards have been replaced with white boards or even smart boards and tables and chairs have replaced desks, but the core process largely has remained the same. A teacher stands in front of the students and shares knowledge that the students are expected to absorb. No wonder there is so much emphasis on smaller class sizes. How else can a single teacher connect with individual students? But what if that entire protocol was changed? Rather than a single teacher, perhaps there is a very well-paid master teacher with three or four more junior teachers. Rather than smaller class sizes, there are 50 students in a classroom. But, they are working in five pods of 10 kids each. As we sit here in January, some students still are trying to figure out October’s lessons, some are right on track and some have leaped ahead to March. Rather than forcing them all to a mean, computer directed, individualized learning plans could engage all students appropriately. They still would be held to learning standards, the master teacher would guide each group and the junior teachers would provide hands-on assistance. Certainly, there are many, many people with more expertise in education than I posses and better models can be developed. The point, though, is that with fewer teachers and better, more accessible technology, “full funding” of schools should not mean putting billions of dollars more into sustaining old models, especially when those old models seem to be failing in producing the outcomes needed (and acknowledging that educational achievement depends on parental involvement, stable homes, good health care, safe neighborhoods, etc., in addition to what occurs in the classroom).
As always, Tom, a masterful analysis and context-setting.
You often wind up on the topic of education. What new context are we in when a middle schooler can use AI to write like Steinbeck? In the AI dominated future, what will we mean by the term “labor?” “Worker?” “work?”
How much of your policy proscriptions are based on a pre-AI paradigm defining the individual’s relationship to the State and the economy?
A handful of school districts are experimenting with different ways to more fully integrate technology into classrooms, using AI and other advances to create curricula that are better tailored to each student. Consider, for example, how nearly every child today from an early age accesses information - online. But when they get to school, most of the time is spent in the same environment you and I experienced in our long-ago youth. Perhaps the blackboards have been replaced with white boards or even smart boards and tables and chairs have replaced desks, but the core process largely has remained the same. A teacher stands in front of the students and shares knowledge that the students are expected to absorb. No wonder there is so much emphasis on smaller class sizes. How else can a single teacher connect with individual students? But what if that entire protocol was changed? Rather than a single teacher, perhaps there is a very well-paid master teacher with three or four more junior teachers. Rather than smaller class sizes, there are 50 students in a classroom. But, they are working in five pods of 10 kids each. As we sit here in January, some students still are trying to figure out October’s lessons, some are right on track and some have leaped ahead to March. Rather than forcing them all to a mean, computer directed, individualized learning plans could engage all students appropriately. They still would be held to learning standards, the master teacher would guide each group and the junior teachers would provide hands-on assistance. Certainly, there are many, many people with more expertise in education than I posses and better models can be developed. The point, though, is that with fewer teachers and better, more accessible technology, “full funding” of schools should not mean putting billions of dollars more into sustaining old models, especially when those old models seem to be failing in producing the outcomes needed (and acknowledging that educational achievement depends on parental involvement, stable homes, good health care, safe neighborhoods, etc., in addition to what occurs in the classroom).