Earlier quoted context omitted.
Stress levels for introverts.
You’re gonna have to talk about your work to people that matter at some point in your life. You can’t keep hiding behind being an introvert your whole life.
Who did Satoshi talk to?
Implications of AI to schools
441–447 of 447 posts
Re: Implications of AI to schools
#442Earlier quoted context omitted.
Companies and governments use to do testing all the time. A number of lawsuits about those practices being discriminatory resulted in them going away.
No, they used to do IQ tests which were found discriminatory (and don't correlate with job performance). Tests and problems directly or indirectly related to the job are not only legal, but are commonly used (leetcode).
Chicago police and fire had a lot of problems with their entrance exams and promotion exams. Don’t know if they were strictly IQ tests.
Re: Implications of AI to schools
#443Earlier quoted context omitted.
My son is learning algebra in 2nd grade. They don’t call it “algebra” yet nor mention “variables”, but they’re working on questions like solving “4 + ? = 9”. He just goes to our local public elementary school.
Yeah I guess technically that's algebra but at that age it is based on memorization (you just learn that 4 + 5 = 9) and you're not actually using algebra to solve the problem e.g. "subtract 4 from both sides of the equation."
True, and it’s only 2nd grade, but it’s clearly setting the foundation for learning algebra properly.
Of course, when he asked for help with his practice problems I had no idea how they were meant to solve it so I taught him to solve it algebraically.
Re: Implications of AI to schools
#444Most of what schools teach is either useless or toxic. They rarely teach practical skills. I would argue for getting people to use handwriting/cursive as a workaround for this issue. It would mean that if they did use AI then they would have to process some of the content mentally rather than just present it.
> Most of what schools teach is either useless or toxic You must have a pretty broad definition of useless / toxic if you think that reading, writing and basic math, but also geometry, calculus, linear algebra, probability theory, foreign languages, a broad overview of history, and basic competency in physics / electronics fall under these categories. Sure, I learned a lot in school that turned out to be pretty usele…
I was generalising of course, but that was my experience. My god daughter came out of school barely able to read or write. Others I know just remember being bullied by teachers.
Out of that list you mention there (from my personal experience), we were never taught calculus, linear algebra or probability theory. The maths was very basic and uninspiring. The foreign language teaching was next to useless. (I learnt more in six months learning German after high school than six years of French in high school.) The science teaching was okay. The history teaching was appalling (I do like history but we were taught it in such a dull fashion, and from only one or two angles.)
It would have been useful for me to learn basic cookery, how to open a bank account and so on. Sewing and clothing repair would also have been handy. We did do some carpentry and I.T. (which is obsolete, but was a useful foundation). I do use some of what I learnt in Geography class.
Against this, they tried to instill some horrible habits in us. Like they would punish all of us when one person did something wrong (and they didn't know who). I saw that across multiple schools, and I still resent it. There was also the notion that we should obey teachers without question and accept everything they say (and they were frequently wrong). In my last school, you either went straight into university or the military but at that point in life neither was an option.
Re: Implications of AI to schools
#445Earlier quoted context omitted.
Tests are a way of largely seeing if a response to a question was memorized. The lesson of how to swim sometimes only comes in applying the learning.
> Tests are a way of largely seeing if a response to a question was memorized. Some tests require memorized knowledge, like what is the stall speed of your airplane. Some tests require reasoning skills, like what is the stress in this beam.
These are different levels of learning.
There are learning frameworks that explain it all well enough.
Learning what something is, vs applying what you learned has different terminology in the learning world, but not everyone might use that.
Re: Implications of AI to schools
#446Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not 0 time, but yes, integrity preservation is an arms race. The best solutions are in student motivations and optimal pedagogical design. Students who want to learn, and learning systems that are optimized for rate of learning.
That's the best solution. The easiest solution is to move away from homework and into classwork.
In some narrow contexts that is easy, but in many other contexts that is not easy, or doesn't actually solve it.
online programs, limited infrastructure, dishonest students exploiting accessibility programs, are some examples where it's easier to say than do what you're suggesting.
Also AI can help students cheat in class too. Smart glasses, pens with cameras and LED screens on them (yes really), or just regular smart phones. Even switching to pen and paper won't reduce the ease of access.
Instructors don't want to police cheating, they want to teach (or do research). Either way, they don't want to police.
Students cheat when they think what they're learning is low value, the learning process is too clunky, or they place too high a value on the grade. All these imbalances can be improved with better pedagogy.
The only enduring way to actually solve the cheating crisis isn't to make it harder, it's to reduce the value of cheating. Everything else is either temporary or performative.
Re: Implications of AI to schools
#447Earlier quoted context omitted.
Depends how you work. I've rarely (never?) drafted anything and almost all of the first approach ended up in the final result. It would look pretty close to "typed in the AI answer with very minor modifications after". I'm not saying that was a great way to do it, but I definitely wouldn't want to be failed for that.
I don't mean formal multiple drafts. Even just editing bits, moving stuff around. I guess some people can type out a 5,000 word assignment linearly from start to finish in 2 hours at 40wpm but that's both incredibly rare and easy to verify upon further investigation.
You got it.