School leaders believe pairing AI and life skill courses is the future of education.
School leaders believe pairing AI and life skill courses is the future of education.
Alpha private school leaders believe AI learning paired with life skill courses will be the standard for modern schools in the future. The school doesn't have teachers but instead uses what it calls "guides."
I wouldn't be surprised if some form of automated education becomes a big thing in the future, but this is just a shit idea right now meant to keep costs low and profits up.
I don't know about 'automated' education, but we 100% SHOULD have been using technology as an education AMPLIFIER for a long time already. No AI needed for that.
My wife is in education and spent over a decade teaching science at an alternative public school (the "You've fallen behind due to illness, pregnancy, or family issues, so come here to catch up" type, NOT the "You're a total delinquent, here's a 'prison classroom'" type) that did self-paced learning.
She had recorded a ton videos of herself teaching all of the various concepts/standards that were required by the state for her subjects. She also had assignments ready for the entire course, and labs which could mostly be done by the students with minimal direct interaction by the teacher.
So the kids would come in, check in with her on what was the next thing they needed to work on, then would watch the video on their Chromebook and then do the assignment or lab. She'd be there for them to ask her about anything they didn't understand, or for whatever help they needed.
There were of course some labs and assignments that they would schedule to be done by the whole class at a given time, when it was necessary, or made more sense.
So the kids who picked it up quickly could finish a semester worth of work and learning within a month or two, leaving her more time to spend helping the kids who were struggling with a given concept.
It also gave opportunities for the kids who had mastered a concept to be able to help those who hadn't.
I see no reason similar methodologies and technologies couldn't be employed at regular schools to amplify the ability of teachers to educate students and give the teachers more time to help the ones who weren't picking things up as quickly, without holding back the students who were.
I won't be surprised if what you are describing becomes how education is handled going forward for high school and college, but I don't think it will be a blanket solution for everyone.
I also think that the implementation of the technology will likely be done to reduce the reliance on qualified teaching staff rather than to free up their time.
Even as it is now, I could see it being good for some kids.
I certainly could’ve benefitted from a guided, fully-self-paced curriculum. I was bored off my ass in high school.
Like this, you could teach an entire high school and have a teacher:student ratio of like 1:200. Really just need SMEs annd a big computer lab, and that’s it.
But it’s definitely not for everyone. Most kids need more hands-on, especially with new topics. And there has to be human oversight (humans writing exams/quizzes and intervening if the AI is incorrect or ineffective).
The issue isn't the approach, it's the accuracy. AI are statistical models. They're not designed to give right answers. They're designed to give believable answers, which area occasionally correct.
So who knows what these kids are learning. It could be ridiculous inaccuracies like Columbus peacefully discovering America.
No, the value of a computer based education is that you don't need SME's on site. Instead, you could get away with one home office developing the lesson plans, then distributing their work across a state. Specialty graders could be hired to handle anything that the computer can't grade.
The schools themselves would just have enough teachers that are the equivalent of substitute teachers keeping order.
"We don't have teachers," said Alpha private school cofounder MacKenzie Price. "Now, what we do have is a lot of adults who are in the room engaging with these kids, working as coaches. So they're helping the kids get clear on what are some goals that they're working on, what are they doing academically? What are they interested in? How can we really turn on that spark for learning?"
So they have teachers, they just aren't calling them that. Maybe they're not specialized or have the proper training, but they're still acting as teachers. Probably trying to fuck over the trained teachers though. That's our national sport.
"AI is a powerful technology that can enhance the learning experience for school children, but it cannot replace teachers entirely. AI can help with some aspects of teaching, such as personalizing instruction, providing feedback, creating content, and analyzing data. However, AI cannot provide the human touch that teachers can, such as mentoring, facilitating, empathizing, and inspiring students. Teachers are also essential for teaching students how to use AI responsibly and ethically, and how to think critically about its impact on society.
Therefore, the answer to your question is no, AI cannot teach school children without teachers. AI can be a useful tool for teachers and students, but it cannot substitute for the human element that is vital for education. Teachers and AI can work together to create a better learning environment for school children."
Will they be the same people wondering where all the jobs are? How AI gets tweaked to offer a slanted instead of a factual and historically correct education?
They absolutely do. However, humans aren’t monolithic, and there will be those that make some effort to be more accurate even when surrounded by those with an opposing agenda.
A single AI will likely be monolithic and can be reprogrammed if it shows any signs of dissent.
Jobs are not going away, this myth needs to die. It will simply shift to whatever people are willing to pay for, just like it has done for the last 100 years.
Just like how forklifts didn't replace human labor, AI will not replace mental labor. It's simply impossible, with the scope of the problems we have any additional mental computation is advantageous no matter how minor it may be to an AI.
You mean all the jobs that did things like: go overseas to cheaper labor. Underpay. Turn into gig economy jobs. Underpay. Who is going to pay to move these people who get displaced out of their jobs and into another market? Nobody.
“Simply shift…”
Real myopic, flippant and oversimplified answer you give that completely ignores the cost and personal economic fallout to the displaced individuals.
So the premise of the Dune series is the Butlerian Jihad, where humans destroyed all "thinking machines" and declared that no machine would ever be made in the likeness of a human mind again. That's why everything's analogue, humans that can do computing in their head, etc.
But unlike what one might think, they didn't destroy thinking machines because AI robots had taken over (though his son Brian Herbert missed that memo). They destroyed thinking machines because, after humans had created AI, they were happy to offload any and all responsibilities and decisions. Humans turned to AI to make any decision, and at a certain point AI ran the galaxy, not because it had taken over, but because humans couldn't be bothered. They stopped learning, they stopped innovating, they stopped doing the things core to being humans.
So as I watch humans hand over more and more tasks and control to AI, apparently including teaching their children, I expect we're heading to the same crossroads at some point.
Computers make excellent servants, they take orders well and do exactly what they're told to do. I can't even imagine how it could possibly "teach" anyone anything.
You can program AI you see, not as simple programing real flesh and blood human beings who care about education as they're the only ones stupid enough to accept the meager pay, stress, and vilification needed to survive in that field.