I co-teach AP Computer Science A through Microsoft’s TEALS program. The classroom runs on Chromebooks, Google Classroom, and code.org (AWS). Corporate infrastructure top to bottom. This year I added an AI tutor. That’s apparently the controversial part.
The research is interesting: a Wharton study found students using standard ChatGPT performed 17% worse on exams—the “crutch” effect. But students using AI with pedagogical guardrails showed no negative effect. The problem isn’t AI in education. It’s unguided AI. So I built a tutor that asks probing questions instead of giving answers. I’m sharing the prompt I use and how to set one up yourself.
While, China made AI education mandatory for six-year-olds this year. We’re still deciding whether to block ChatGPT.
This article reads like it was written entirely by AI, and I’m willing to bet the “Promt Author” won’t deny this either given their promotion of AI. Its not just the em dashes, there’s a particular AI vernacular that’s becoming more and more obvious.
I don’t disagree with the idea that we need to prepare our future generations for the rapidly changing world of technologies etc, but like most others in the comments, I’m sceptical about embracing these technologies without careful consideration for what it means for generational knowledge and human intelligence in general.
One of the best (also most intimidating) teachers I ever had would do this when students asked questions - asked questions in response, gradually leading the student to discover, by publicly stating, what they understood and what they did not.
Everyone misunderstood him (Turkish guy teaching EMF in the US) and thought he was just trying to embarrass and shame them. Though to be fair, I DO think he had some serious resentment toward the sense of entitlement many students approach their education with, and I share it.
His attitude left a bit to be desired, but if you were willing to humble yourself and truly engage with him when you asked a question (AKA not just retreat when he starts probing) - he just had this magical ability to ask questions until you revealed (seemingly to yourself) precisely what you had missed. Never really seen anything quite like it, he was distinct. And he respected and became warm with the students who would humble themselves and publicly try, too, which came as a shock given his permanently grumpy, disappointed demeanor. Plus he went some years where no students achieved that breakthrough, so his reputation never included notes about such.
(Uhh, my bad, just went down memory lane and only some of that has to do with what you said lmao)
100% the situation. He provided exactly zero info or context that he was up to that, however 😂
First - intense lecture - terse, clipped, accurate - then half-shouting while eyeballing everyone in the room, at the parts one can only assume are most often misunderstood.
And then, “you may ask questions”. Lmao. Legend. And he really would do exactly that, and extremely competently, and would enjoy it if anyone engaged. His enjoyment was genuine but also similarly illegible, lol. I have a feeling he wildly outclassed even his peers at the school, bro’s frustration was like a wound, sadly.
Learned a ton from the guy, but can’t say many did overall, he offered it but didn’t exactly invite. Gateway experience for a ton of degree candidates, that whole deal.
Not even at a particularly serious school lol. Like I said. Legend. “You will learn this [hapless candidate chasing a dollar by pretending knowledge] - to my standards - or you will not proceed. I offer everything you need and much more, but you must do the work.”
The classroom runs on Chromebooks, Google Classroom, and code.org (AWS). Corporate infrastructure top to bottom.
This is so dystopian. Get the kids hooked on XaaS while they are young, and you’ll have a customer for life.
I’m so happy I live in a welfare state, and gee I hope we manage to make the switch away from the US big tech monopoly.
Thanks for volunteering to flood the workforce with useless idiots!
Hard pass. There absolutely should be no AI in any classroom under any circumstances. The whole point of a classroom is to build a foundation on which to understand the fundamentals before they slap a set of training wheels on and vibe-code their way into disaster. Most of these LLMs ignore whatever guardrails you slap on them far too frequently.
The most important lesson these kids need to learn is if you can’t do it yourself, you shouldn’t be letting an LLM do it for you. If the best you can say about the effects is “This version doesn’t seem to be actively harming them” then the bar is in hell, and we shouldn’t be playing with these tools at all at this point.
I got into volunteering through TEALS, Microsoft’s nonprofit.
Good for you / I’m sorry to hear that
The class runs on Chromebooks managed by Google Classroom, writing code on code.org—which is powered by AWS.
My condolences to the students. It sounds like they’re already being brought up in a world where they are expected to own nothing and be happy.
I hope you teach them about how terrible this privacy violation is, and how they are slowly being groomed into dependency.
Corporate infrastructure is already the foundation of public CS education.
That’s very sad too.
…wait, you’re upset because you want to indoctrinate the children with more stuff?
Yeah, no. The state of affairs is sad, but a common complaint about AI in the classroom is there is no open source, federated, or other ‘free’ version. It sucks, but we need to work with the tools we have.
a common complaint about AI in the classroom is there is no open source, federated, or other ‘free’ version. It sucks,
The usable free LLMs that can be run on-prem sucks? Is that what sucks? Because there are some.
Do the complainers know they’re complaining about a non-issue? Can you use that situation to help describe what Beggaring the Question means?
No, de decisively don’t “need to work with the tools we have”. We have to teach our students the dangers if that abomination and ways to disrupt, hamper, poison and destroy this stuff.
Don’t the tools we have include internet and even (gasp) book literacy rather than going to a chatbot? At very best, evidence AI helps anyone is shaky. At worst, we are witnessing a reverse Flynn effect in education right now, and this alleged tool - besides not doing what was promised and can’t even make enough money to prop itself up - has been caught enticing children into suicide. If a billionaire genius like Sam Altman can’t code in a guardrail to save a child’s life, how can you?
Why encourage it?
Are the children being taught a tool, or are they being used as guinea pigs?
“Using” AI is not well defined. I assume the one that showed no difference is because the students found it useless.
Eactly! The cohert that showed no difference didn’t provide guidance of any sort, just provided GPT-4 as a resource. The cohert that benifited had a tutor agent setup and the students were instructed to treat it like a tutor. Like calculators, computers, and the Internet before, we need to design curriculum with AI in mind for it to be useful.
