> Pupils from first through seventh grade, aged 6 to 13, should as a general rule not be using AI, while those in lower secondary school, aged 14 to 16, can cautiously adopt tools under teachers' supervision, the government said. Sounds right to me. Kids under 13 need to learn to read, write and comprehend text. Generative AI is not going to help them with those skills. They can play with AI at home, and after 13 the…
Connect the dots also banned, though there is some discussion of loosening the rules to allow interpolating up to four points.
> You can definitely learn from the way AI solves a math question. Challenge: learn some math from AI. Sleep on it. Duplicate it on paper the next day.
I already saw it in my life: a ban on calculators, a ban on computers. But after a short period of rejection, everybody starts to embrace the new tech. Instead of bans we were getting computer classes in schools.
Calculators might be allowed sometimes, but i dont think they are ever allowed when you are trying to teach school children how to add and multiply. Which feels like the appropriate comparison.
Here's how to tell if their homework is done by AI: if the homework was much better quality than the in-class work.
Not always. I once got accused of cheating at University because my take-home assignment was so much better than my in class work. At home there was no pressure to perform. I could practice and try things.
I once was accused of cheating as well, as my term paper was "too good". (Long before computers.) I brought in my cites (books) the next day and dumped it on his desk. He grudgingly changed the grade from F to A.
Can agree on that. The description of the paper also said: AI users who maintain similar homework completion time as non-AI users experience small learning losses. This was a surprise too me. I would have thought otherwise. Would love to see some evidence about if more or less people fall behind and have worse results. In my head the AI should be able to get the weakest students a bit highere.
> In my head the AI should be able to get the weakest students a bit higher I think the evidence so far is all students lose learning and cognition, but the brighter students lose less.
The losses are largest in social science subjects, followed by STEM and languages, and are especially large for junior students, high-achieving students, and boys.
No mention of the weakest student. Which probably means they did not have a significant worse or better score
I'd ban all technology in the classroom. What works is chalkboard and chalk, pencil and paper. You'll never get strong by watching a video of people lifting weights. Similarly, you'll never understand math by watching a video or having an AI do the work for you. And, somehow, writing out the words and equations by hand is very effective for learning. https://www.holdenluntz.com/artists/keystone-press-agency/al...
I do not think your example is at all fair. You can definitely learn from the way AI solves a math question.
Not really, you might understand it in the moment, but to learn something you need to do actual work.
An example is, watch a thousand hours on photography, how to take great photos.
Go out and try to take great photos, you will fail. This is why all serious tutors keep saying ”stop watching and go out and take photos, every day, all the time”.
I don’t know Rust, but I can understand AI outputting some Rust code if I ask it to. Two days later I won’t be able to write it again.
Spend a few minutes on the teacher subreddits: /r/teachers and /r/professors, specifically. AI has been a disaster for student outcomes and educator performance, more or less across the board. It should be banned in education, but there's no way to enforce that without increasing educator workload substantially (eliminating homework and re-working lesson plans around that; moving tests and projects back into the clas…
> without increasing educator workload substantially Isn't this a good thing, employing more educators, building more schools? Any sane society will always invest more into its future well being and incentivize investments into education.
Not sure what country you live in, but I don't think that the US falls under your definition of a "sane society"
I do not think your example is at all fair. You can definitely learn from the way AI solves a math question.
> You can definitely learn from the way AI solves a math question. Challenge: learn some math from AI. Sleep on it. Duplicate it on paper the next day.
It’s not math but I’m using AI to help study and learn DSA. I’m finding it helpful.
But yeah you need to make attempts to apply what you’re learning and answer questions on your own. You can’t simply watch problems being solved (whether by an AI or a person) and retain it.
I'd ban all technology in the classroom. What works is chalkboard and chalk, pencil and paper. You'll never get strong by watching a video of people lifting weights. Similarly, you'll never understand math by watching a video or having an AI do the work for you. And, somehow, writing out the words and equations by hand is very effective for learning. https://www.holdenluntz.com/artists/keystone-press-agency/al...
> I'd ban all technology in the classroom. What works is chalkboard and chalk, pencil and paper.
You've prohibited technology and then listed four technologies. "Technology" needs a more concrete definition. Calculators? Computers? TVs? Overhead projectors? Musical instruments?
I'd ban all technology in the classroom. What works is chalkboard and chalk, pencil and paper. You'll never get strong by watching a video of people lifting weights. Similarly, you'll never understand math by watching a video or having an AI do the work for you. And, somehow, writing out the words and equations by hand is very effective for learning. https://www.holdenluntz.com/artists/keystone-press-agency/al...
> I'd ban all technology in the classroom. What works is chalkboard and chalk, pencil and paper. You've prohibited technology and then listed four technologies. "Technology" needs a more concrete definition. Calculators? Computers? TVs? Overhead projectors? Musical instruments?
This is nitpicking
And sure, kids 6-13 don't need calculators, basic stuff, like multiplication tables is memorized.