This article proposes a list of questions (and elements of answer) that can help guide schools’ responses to the disruptions (opportunities and threats) generated by the rapid growth of artificial intelligence. Largely derived from the UNESCO’S Guidance for generative AI in education and research , its goal is to allow schools to leverage the full power of these technologies, all while avoiding their many pitfalls. This list follows a logical order to outline a systematic plan of action. The truth is, however, that an appropriate response to such fast-changing developments can only be agile. A proper AI action plan can thus not be sequential, or even cyclical. Its various components must run in parallel,continuously, and interdependently, to ensure adaptive adaptations to an ongoing revolution.
From the beginning to the end of their research project, AI can help students plan their work, brainstorm guiding questions, find, explore, and evaluate resources, as well as assist with the writing process. Properly used, these tools can help ensure that artificial intelligence enhances rather than replaces human intelligence. And when in doubt, AI can also help guarantee academic honesty by scaling automated viva voce! Here are some of the most powerful AI options currently available to scaffold research skills.
"MagicSchoolAI", quite a good name for a free tool helping teachers leverage the power of artificial intelligence to plan authentic and relevant summatives, address common misconceptions, adapt materials to reading levels, create concept-formation activities, extension opportunities, checks for understanding and formatives; scaffold long-term assignments, and provide exemplary responses, as well as iterative feedback. Here is an example of what a short "superpowered" unit might look like.
The benefits of instructional coaching for teachers and their students are undeniable, and indeed not really a debate anymore. For what it is worth, Hattie, in his Visible Learning For Teachers, reported an effect size of .51 for the practice, well beyond the targeted effectiveness threshold. What does remain problematic, however, are 3 outstanding issues. Fortunately, recent advances in artificial intelligence provide a simple solution. This is why I took advantage of the simple interface provided by Poe.com to design an AI-powered instructional coach: Ed.
This article is, admittedly, yet another drop added to the ongoing wave of AI-related materials. As a matter of fact, this is precisely its subject: How do we navigate the deluge of content AI already generates (both directly and indirectly)? Since the general public gained access to ChatGPT, just a few months ago, a relentless flood of AI-related content--ranging from social media platforms like Twitter and LinkedIn to more formal academic publications--has engulfed our educational circles.
If “culture eats strategy for breakfast”, climate is what sets the ambiance–and the appetite around the table. Yet, while the attention of school leaders has long been drawn to the importance of school culture, much less emphasis has been placed on school climate as a variable and potential lever in their action. Here, a simple model is proposed to explain what organizational climate is, and how it relates to organizational change.
Some time ago, I reviewed the main reasons why traditional job interviews don’t work (Schmidt and Hunter, 1998; Young and Delli, 2002), i.e., are very poor predictors of future job performance, and proposed ways to improve the teacher (and leader) recruitment process by employing what schools know to be best practices in evaluation. Since then, the rapid spread of generative AI tools has made these recommendations easier to adopt and likely even more effective. As transformative as they could be in the classroom for student learning, the benefits of chatbots might be just as considerable “in the offices” for school leadership.
In his Republic, Plato used the tale of the ring of Gyges to ask the question: would we do what is right if we had access to an artifact that made us invisible? Arguably, AI is such a magical device, making it possible for students to generate answers to any questions that are good enough to get them the grades they want, and undetectable. In this context, educators need to adapt and rethink their practice. How can we ensure assessments are useful and reliable, when students can so easily offload their thinking onto chatbots’ machine learning? Or, in other words, how can we actually teach and evaluate anything in the matrix?
As ChatGPT started to go viral, an obvious concern among teachers was the potentially destructive impact in education of this technology, which made “cheating” more tempting than ever before. With their generative AI capacities, ChatGPT and similar bots seemed to have created a new form of plagiarism that was so easy, effective, and “safe” (undetectable), as to make many forms of assessment obsolete. To the relief of many, AI-detectors were made available almost as immediately. Yet, as a simple experiment demonstrates, these tools might soon be doomed, if they are not already useless. Is "fighting AI with AI" a pointless pursuit?
Number 69 in my list of AI-Powered UDL Strategies reads: "Teach students how to use chatbots as a more knowledgeable other modeling, checking, correcting, and extending their understandings and skills". As noted in the conclusion of the e-book, such strategies, which describe "what" AI can do in the educational context, are only a first step. Next, we need to explain "how" teachers can help students take advantage of such opportunities. Here, I provide an example of what that can look like: a chatbot helping students discover and apply the scientific method to investigate a psychological question of their choice.