Scripted Spontaneity

As a middle school science teacher who's all about keeping it real for my students, I have to say this article from Texas A&M's business school has me raising an eyebrow. Don't get me wrong - there's some good stuff in here, but let's break it down with a critical eye.

First off, kudos to the researchers for acknowledging the very real anxiety many young people feel about AI taking over jobs. I see this worry in my own students' eyes when we talk about future careers. The idea that some are pivoting to trades as a result? Totally tracks.

But here's where I start to side-eye:

1. Of course a university is going to promote the value of a college degree. It's literally their business model. Not saying they're wrong, but let's consider the source.

2. The argument that AI will mainly handle "mundane tasks" feels a bit optimistic. Have you seen what ChatGPT can do lately? It's not just data entry, folks.

3. That said, I do agree with the emphasis on developing critical thinking, problem-solving, and emotional intelligence. These are skills I push hard in my classroom, AI or no AI.

4. The call center example? Sure, it sounds nice in theory. But let's be real - how many companies are going to keep a full staff of human operators once AI can handle most calls?

Here's my take for my fellow educators: We absolutely should be teaching our students to work WITH AI tools. They're here to stay. But let's also be honest that the job market is going to shift in ways we can't fully predict yet.

Instead of promising that a specific degree or career path is "safe," let's focus on building adaptable learners who can roll with whatever changes come their way. And maybe, just maybe, we should be having more conversations about what a society looks like when a lot of traditional jobs really do get automated.

What do you think? Am I being too skeptical, or not skeptical enough? Let me know in the comments!​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​

Fellow educators, gather 'round for a tale of artificial intelligence, frustration, and the quest for the perfect digital teaching assistant. Spoiler alert: We're not there yet, but the journey is half the fun (and at least 75% of the learning).

Picture this: You're knee-deep in grading papers, lesson planning, and trying to figure out how to make the water cycle exciting for the 47th time this year. Suddenly, a shiny new AI chatbot appears, promising to solve all your problems! It'll grade papers, plan lessons, and even explain why water is actually super cool (pun intended). Sounds amazing, right?

Not so fast, my eager educator friends. As it turns out, these AI chatbots are a bit like that one overconfident student who always raises their hand first – lots of enthusiasm, but not always on target.

The AI Learning Paradox (or, "You Don't Know What You Don't Know")

Here's the kicker: To get the most out of these AI tools, you need to already be an expert in both the subject matter AND in using AI itself. It's like needing to be fluent in Spanish to use a Spanish-English dictionary effectively. Counterintuitive much?

Imagine trying to learn a new topic from an AI tutor. You start with the basics, feeling pretty good about yourself. But then you hit that dreaded zone of proximal development (shout out to my boy Vygotsky), and things get... weird.

Monday: AI says do it this way!

Tuesday: Actually, forget that. Try this instead!

Wednesday: A wild new AI appears with completely different advice!

Thursday: The AI gets an update and now speaks exclusively in haiku.

It's like having a revolving door of highly knowledgeable but incredibly fickle substitute teachers. As the learner, you're left feeling more confused than a chameleon in a bag of Skittles.

The Bullsh*t Detector (or Lack Thereof)

Another fun quirk of our AI friends? They're really good at making stuff up, or as the academics call it, "bullsh*tting." (See, even AI can be cool sometimes). The problem is, as learners, we often can't tell when the AI is confidently spouting nonsense.

It's like that one time I asked ChatGPT to explain quantum physics, and it gave me a detailed explanation involving cats, boxes, and something called "Schrödinger's litter tray." Sounded legit to me, but I'm pretty sure actual physicists would be face-palming hard enough to create their own gravitational waves.

So, What's a Teacher to Do?

Before you swear off technology and retreat to a cabin in the woods (tempting, I know), there's hope! The key is to stop thinking of AI as a magic chatbot and start thinking of it as a tool – like a really smart, occasionally confused Swiss Army knife.

Here's what we need:

1. Specialized AI: Instead of one-size-fits-all chatbots, we need AI tailored for specific subjects and learning levels. Think less "Jack of all trades, master of none" and more "hyper-focused nerd who really knows their stuff."

2. Guided Learning: AI that knows when to step back and say, "Hey kid, maybe you should ask your teacher about this one." We want digital assistants, not digital enablers.

3. Multimodal Magic: Let's move beyond text-based chats. Give me an AI that can analyze a student's work, suggest resources, and maybe even do a little interpretive dance to explain photosynthesis.

4. The Human Touch: Remember, we're the experts here. AI should enhance our teaching, not replace it. Use it to spark ideas, save time on routine tasks, and free up more energy for what really matters – connecting with our students.

The AI Revolution is Coming (Whether We Like It or Not)

Let's face it, folks – AI in education isn't going away. But that doesn't mean we have to settle for subpar chatbots masquerading as tutors. It's time for us to get proactive, to demand better tools that actually support learning instead of just regurgitating information.

So, the next time an edtech salesperson tries to sell you on the latest and greatest AI tutor, channel your inner skeptical teenager. Ask the hard questions. Demand AI that works for us, not the other way around.

And remember, at the end of the day, no AI can replace the impact of a passionate, dedicated teacher. We're the ones who truly understand our students, who can spark that love of learning, and who can explain – for the 48th time – why the water cycle is actually pretty darn cool.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I need to go ask ChatGPT how to build a lightsaber. For science class, of course.​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​

I've been devouring Dan Meyer's writing like it's the last slice of pizza at a faculty meeting - insightful, entertaining, and occasionally spicy enough to make you choke on your coffee. Now, while I don't always see eye-to-eye with his AI skepticism (come on, Dan, even Skynet had some good ideas), I can't help but nod along to his latest nugget of wisdom in the Mathworlds newsletter.

Meyer, channeling his inner educational Nostradamus, drops this truth bomb while discussing David Labaree's "Someone Has To Fail":

“You also have to enjoy this madness. You have to imagine yourself happy here. You have to take some pleasure when your work underperforms your expectations because it means you’re going to get into some classrooms, talk to some teachers, watch some students, and if you are very, very lucky, unlearn one more lie you once believed about this work. To do anything less is to blame students for being students and teachers for trying to work within constraints we wouldn’t dream of setting for other professionals like doctors or lawyers.”

He's talking to the edtech wizards and AI alchemists out there, and folks, he's hitting the nail on the head so hard, it's seeing stars.

But wait, there's more! Meyer doesn't stop there. He goes full Gordon Ramsay on edtech celebrities like Sal Khan, roasting their hypocrisy like it's an overcooked mystery meat in the school cafeteria. And let me tell you, I am HERE for it.

So, grab your popcorn and pull up a chair, because this educational showdown is getting good. Meyer's taking names, and he's not afraid to use red ink. Who's next on his hit list? Only time (and the next newsletter) will tell!​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​

As a middle school science teacher with a passion for progressive education, I have to say - this article

gets my neurons firing! Dr. Kazmi paints an exciting picture of how AI could revolutionize learning, especially for underserved students. But let's not get ahead of ourselves, folks. 

First off, I love that Dr. Kazmi started experimenting with edtech way back in the 90s. As a fellow teacher, I can totally relate to that mix of awe at the technology and fear of being replaced. But she quickly figured out how to use the tech to augment her teaching rather than replace it. That's the key, my friends.

Now, let's talk about those three big problems AI could help solve:

1. Personalized learning resources: Heck yes! Imagine if every student had their own AI tutor, adjusting lessons on the fly. No more teaching to the middle while the strugglers get lost and the high flyers get bored. But we've gotta make sure these AI tutors don't perpetuate biases or invade student privacy. 

2. Teacher support: As someone who's stayed up way too late grading papers, I'm all for AI taking over some of the tedious admin work. And AI lesson planning support? Sign me up! But let's not forget the human touch. An AI can't replicate that "aha!" moment when a student finally gets a tricky concept.

3. Multilingual content creation: This is huge for equity. If AI can quickly translate quality educational content into local languages, we could level the playing field for so many students. But as Dr. Kazmi points out, we need rigorous quality control. Google Translate isn't going to cut it for complex science concepts.

What I appreciate most about this article is Dr. Kazmi's emphasis on ethical implementation. We can't just throw AI at education and hope for the best. We need to carefully consider equity, privacy, ethics, accuracy, and impact. 

So fellow educators, let's embrace the AI revolution - but let's do it thoughtfully. Use AI to enhance your teaching, not replace it. And always, always keep your students' needs at the forefront. 

Now if you'll excuse me, I'm off to see if I can get an AI to grade these lab reports. Just kidding! ...maybe.​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​

Well folks, it looks like our AI tutoring tools might be a double-edged sword after all. A new study out of the University of Pennsylvania shows that while ChatGPT and its ilk can boost student performance in the moment, they may actually be harming long-term learning. 

The researchers ran a massive experiment with nearly 1,000 high school students, giving some access to an AI tutor for math practice problems. No surprise, the AI-assisted students crushed it on those practice questions. But here's the kicker - when tested later without AI help, they actually performed worse than students who never had access to begin with.

It's like the AI became a crutch, preventing students from really internalizing the concepts. They got dependent on having all the answers at their fingertips instead of struggling through problems on their own. Classic case of "give a man a fish" vs "teach a man to fish."

Now before we all panic and ban ChatGPT from our classrooms, there is a silver lining. The researchers also tested an AI tutor with some guardrails built in - things like not giving away full answers and pushing students to show their work. This "GPT Tutor" version avoided most of the negative effects on learning.

So what's the takeaway for us teachers? AI tools can be incredibly powerful for helping students practice and learn. But we need to be thoughtful about how we deploy them. Unlimited access might feel great in the moment, but could undermine actual skill-building. As with most things in education, it's all about finding the right balance.

The bottom line is that AI isn't going anywhere. Our job as educators is to figure out how to harness its power while still developing independent, critical thinkers. It's a brave new world out there, but I'm confident we're up to the challenge. Who's with me?​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​

Hey fellow science teachers, have you ever wondered if we're trying too hard to keep our students engaged? A recent article about hunter-gatherer societies got me thinking about how we approach science education.

Here's the deal: in hunter-gatherer communities, kids spend a lot of time just hanging around adults, observing without being the center of attention. Sound familiar? Probably not, because we've gone in the complete opposite direction in our classrooms.

Now, I'm not saying we should ignore our students, but maybe there's a middle ground. Here are some ideas we could try:

1. Let students be flies on the wall: Give them chances to watch us prep labs or maintain equipment without feeling like they need to be "on."

2. Don't dumb down the science talk: Have real scientific discussions within earshot. They'll pick up more than you think.

3. Embrace the silence: It's okay if things aren't buzzing all the time. A quiet classroom can be a thinking classroom.

4. Bring back some freedom: Create safe spaces where kids can experiment without us hovering. Peer-to-peer learning is powerful stuff.

5. Show them the real deal: Instead of always going for the flashy field trips, take them to see working scientists in their natural habitat - labs and research sites.

The point isn't to neglect our students, but to give them a more balanced experience. By allowing for some downtime and unstructured observation, we might actually help them develop skills like patience, creativity, and self-reliance - things every good scientist needs.

Remember, we're not just teaching science facts; we're growing future scientists. By taking a page from the hunter-gatherer playbook, we might just set them up for success in ways we hadn't considered before.

What do you think? Have you tried anything like this in your classroom? I'd love to hear your thoughts!​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​

I’ve written before about my ongoing journey toward a gradeless classroom, and after years of trial and error, I’m more convinced than ever that this approach truly empowers students. By focusing less on the pressures of traditional grades, we open up space for genuine learning and growth to flourish. The shift isn’t just theoretical for me—it’s a daily reality that reshapes how I teach and how students engage with the material.

One of my favorite sources of inspiration has always been the insightful Terry Heick over at TeachThought. Every time I dive into their work, it feels like they’re tapping directly into the same frustrations and aspirations I’ve had as a teacher. Terry’s recent article, "How I Eliminated (Almost) All Grading Problems In My Classroom," was no exception. It was one of those pieces that made me stop and think, “Yes, this is exactly what I’ve been doing—and here’s why it works.”

I want to highlight two key ideas from the article that have had the biggest impact on my classroom. If you're trying to find ways to lessen the grading madness while still pushing students toward meaningful learning, these are the ideas worth considering:

1. Choose What to Grade Carefully.
Terry breaks assignments into two categories: measurements and practice—what most teachers would recognize as summative and formative assessments. This approach helps students realize that not every piece of work needs a grade slapped on it. It’s about learning, not just box-checking. When I first implemented a similar system, before I was nudged back toward more traditional grading practices, the shift in student attitudes was immediate. By focusing grades only on measurements, students stop seeing assessments as a gamble. Instead, they begin to internalize the idea that steady practice leads to better performance when it really counts. Less stress, more learning—what’s not to love?

6. Teach Through Micro-Assignments.
This is the heart of building a classroom environment where assessments aren’t intimidating but expected. Terry’s idea of micro-assignments aligns perfectly with the atmosphere I try to create. Frequent, low-stakes opportunities to demonstrate learning give students a clearer picture of their progress. It moves them away from seeing success as the result of one-off moments of brilliance (or luck) and toward understanding that growth happens incrementally. This method fosters confidence and builds the kind of growth mindset we’re all striving to develop in our students. It’s about changing the narrative around assessment—showing students that it’s part of the learning cycle, not the end of it.

If you’re overwhelmed by the thought of radically rethinking grading in your classroom, I get it. But these two strategies are perfect starting points. They won’t solve everything overnight, but they will create a pathway toward a healthier, more learning-focused environment—one where students feel the freedom to explore, grow, and truly engage.

Naturally, we need to temper the excitement about AI's benefits with an understanding of the downsides. We know that AI companies are using huge amounts of electricity to run their servers, but I had not considered the impact on water supplies especially in some of the drought-impacted places in which these companies are expanding.

This article tells the story plainly: https://www.context.news/ai/video/forget-jobs-ai-is-coming-for-your-water?s=09

Many educators—myself included—fear the same outcome as these Special Education teachers. That students will lose empathy and personal contact is a real concern, but I don't think it's caused by AI. The growth of personal electronics is likely a bigger part of that change.

https://time.com/7018588/special-olympics-ai-idd-artificial-intelligence/