upvote

points

by 1970-01-012 hours ago |
comments
upvoteby ceejayoz2 hours ago|
next
[-]
> How could they possibly do worse with it running?

It's almost always possible to do worse.

reply
upvoteby walt_grata2 hours ago|
prev|
next
[-]
using AI to tell you the answer means you don't actually know or understand the answer. You know the entire point of education
reply
upvoteby adrianN1 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
You can also use AI s an endlessly patient tutor. That could be beneficial.
reply
upvoteby walt_grata28 minutes ago|
parent|
next
[-]
is there a way to use it that prevents "tell me the answer", if not that is what enough students will gravitate towards that it will be harmful to society at large. If there is an agent that only works as an infinitely patient tutor, that will under no circumstance do the work for you, then sure. Just have expereience educators dictate the way the agent works and is used, not some marketing dweeb or MBAsshole.
reply
upvoteby ceejayoz1 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
next
[-]
The real world seems like it might come as a shock to someone who learned for two decades from an endlessly patient computer.
reply
upvoteby eesmith32 minutes ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
https://curmudgucation.blogspot.com/2025/06/should-ai-make-s...

> The AI crew's fantasy is that students sitting in front a screen will be motivated because A) the adaptive technology will hit them with exactly the right material for the student and B) shiny! Arnett explains that any dreams of AI-aided motivation are doomed to failure.

> Arnett's explanation is not exactly where I expected we were headed. Human respect is scarce, he argues, because humans only have so much time and attention to parcel out, and so it's valuable. AI has infinite attention resources, can be programed to be always there and always supportive. Arnett argues that makes its feedback worthless in terms of status and respect. ...

> But I think much of what he says here is valuable and valid-- that AI faces a major hurdle in classrooms because it offers no social relationship component, little opportunity to provide students with status or respect. Will folks come up with ways to use AI tools that have those dimensions? No doubt. But the heart of Arnett's argument is an explanation of one more reason that sitting a student in front of an AI-run screen is not a viable future for education.

reply
upvoteby betterunix21 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
next
[-]
There are other ways to use AI in a school setting. Grading homework is a tedious and time-consuming task that would likely be simple for an AI to do.
reply
upvoteby walt_grata31 minutes ago|
parent|
next
[-]
You still have to double check the Agent's grading as they still make frequent minor mistakes, that while they don't really impact coding as much or can be caught with tests, that is not the case here.
reply
upvoteby betterunix214 minutes ago|
parent|
[-]
The actual question to ask is if the agent makes more mistakes than a human being. Grading homework involves reading over similar/identical answers to the same questions over and over, and it is easy for human beings to make mistakes while doing that.

(That is basically the argument for OCR in the postal system -- it does make mistakes but it makes fewer mistakes than human beings.)

reply
upvoteby MetalBreaksAndB1 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
YMMV, but in my school, teachers can access AI while students (mostly) can't. It's possible to allow AI for teachers and not students.
reply
upvoteby 1970-01-011 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
That's certainly one outcome. Another is having AI tell you the answer and you understanding why your answer is incorrect. This is not black and white.
reply
upvoteby walt_grata30 minutes ago|
parent|
next
[-]
If the Agent is designed for that type of interaction and not "do it for me so i don't have to know the details" then yes, but currently that is not supported so teenagers and children will absolutely use it as a "don't make me think" button
reply
upvoteby JumpCrisscross1 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
The current research outcomes seem pretty black and white.
reply
upvoteby eesmith1 hours ago|
prev|
[-]
Some of the worst performance schools are cyber charter schools, which often promote the idea that they use AI as a personal tutor.

If they could get better results with off-the-shelf tools, I'm pretty sure they would.

(Not 100% sure. Some non-profit charters pay a for-profit management company, which suggests commercial software, where the charter, management company, and software provider are all owned by the same person. They may prefer to make more money than improve student grades.)

reply