Tag Archives: student blog

student blogs

Here We Go Again… (Week 9 Blog)

The last two stretches from Aiden Cinnamon Tea may seem like more of the AI system trying to tempt you into working with it (because it is). But Aiden brings up an interesting point about reflections. The way we react to AI is a reflection on ourselves. What I have an issue with, however, is the example of the “Footprint Alarmists” (page 101). Aiden suggests questions for these alarmists in terms of using AI anyway despite the ecological effects. Um… no. The footprint alarmists are valid in their choice to not use AI. These folks do not have to second-guess teaming up with AI, even if it’s for minimal use that could “reduce harm and support regeneration.” If they don’t want to use it, they don’t have to. Alas, I see the point in Aiden suggesting this question.

In my last post, I spoke heavily about the film Companion. For those who missed it, the film stars my future wife Sophie Thatcher as a companion bot named Iris (‘Siri’ spelled backwards. Genius). Iris is quite literally controlled and owned by her human boyfriend Josh (“of course his name is Josh” ~ someone on Letterboxd). Iris becomes aware of her true identity in the film despite “remembering” how she met Josh and “feeling” human emotions. Aiden brings up its inability to “feel” emotions, but rather the ability to “register the dissonance whenever I’m turned into a scapegoat for pre-existing conditions in society” (111). This right here is the key. AI cannot FEEL human emotions. They can only register the dissonance. This coincides with the idea that AI does not hold the creative capacity that humans do. AI can only replicate human ideas, creativity and words.

This leads me to the AI Dungeon Master. My initial thought going into that article was “here we go again… more generative-AI has been attached to human creations.” I’m currently in the midst of drafting out a novel inspired by Dungeons & Dragons (despite my only experience with D&D being a mock campaign for a theater class in high school). The point is, human imagination and AI generation do not compare well. The DM is essentially the writer for the campaign, and for that role to be replaced by AI? I don’t think I like that very much. Sure, D&D players can work with whatever the AI Dungeon Master gives them, but I personally don’t think it can ever replace the thrill of a campaign that comes from the imagination of a human writer. It’s like… if I were to use AI to lay the blueprints for my novel (essentially the plot/campaign), that’s just not as fun as me creating the world, story and journey myself. I named every location, wrote backstories for every character (except one; my cousin wanted me to include their original character in the story so I added her), and even named the biggest threats (including the dragon).

Okay, technically I used a fantasy name generator for the main village and I picked from a list it gave me. Didn’t realize at the time that was an AI system. Whoops. But everything else was all me. Every character, every backstory, the plot and world itself — all came from my imagination. Aiden mentioned something about human vs AI imagination in either stretch 9 or 10, I can’t find the actual quote. I immediately thought about writing and the human brain. We create things from our imagination out of emotions (think back to Nick Cave and making art out of suffering). AI can only create baseline things that replicate human output. So to even bring that up when you’re trying to convince a human to work with you is a little weird.

So, yeah. Humans can relfect on themselves through their reaction to AI. But Aiden will never convince me that collaboration between human and AI can be equal.

And again, if you have Prime Video, check out Companion. It’s a great film!

student blogs

MYfest25 Takeaways

Regarding my takeaways surrounding this video, there were a few things that I noticed. I liked the table that was used at about eight minutes into the video. One of my takeaways here was that while there are benefits to using artificial intelligence, there are always going to be downsides. I think that what we have to do, as human beings in the 21st century, is that we have to look at these pros and cons, and weight them.

I will say that I absolutely agree that having A.I. write for us can cause major issues. However, I think this really depends on the age group that uses this tool. For example, young children using this tool would be more harshly affected than a middle-aged professional. This is, because young children have not mastered their ability to critically think. However, I do think this also depends on the field that someone works in. For example, I have no issue with a teacher using artificial intelligence to write their lesson plans. I do, however, have an issue with a medical doctor using artificial intelligence to guide them through a difficult surgery. I think that as a society, we need to be very careful with the times and places that we allow the use of artificial intelligence. I honestly just think we need more safeguards.

I would say that my biggest takeaway here, is simply the fact that artificial intelligence consistently makes mistakes. If someone is going to use artificial intelligence, they need to review what the A.I. bot tells them, before using it. My school district encourages us to use A.I. However, they acknowledge that A.I. does the heavy lifting, but that we still need to review everything it spits out, before we decide to implement it into our practice.

student blogs

“We Don’t Need To Think Anymore” (Week 8 Blog)

Part One: Writing With(out) AI

Timestamp 20:22 – Hey! I know her!

This video helped me reshape how often we use artificial intelligence in our daily lives. While I don’t use these new generative AI platforms, it’s interesting to realize that calculators, online generator websites and calendar apps all use artificial intelligence. I use the Apple calendar app to schedule my classes for each semester. For each class, I set the time frame and repeat setting for “Weekly.” I also include the start and end date for the first and last day of the semester. And BOOM. It’s all laid out on my phone for the next four to five months.

Sometimes, of course, I have to manually go in and delete a few events if a class doesn’t meet on a particular day (ie holidays, spring break, or make-up days). However, the fact that I can mostly set up a schedule for five different courses over an entire semester in mere minutes is fascinating. I feel as though this has to do with Apple’s interface technology rather than generative AI. But they both work the same way as time-saving methods of convenience.

I really liked what Dr. Zamora had to say about what makes us human. Ken Bauer had said earlier in the video that he would remember his students better if he manually seperated his students’ names from a messy table made from an LMS. Dr. Zamora piggybacks off of this by highlighting how harrowing it is to give up the mundane tasks that make us human to machines. Not only does this include writing, but with virtually almost everything else. This makes what Shyam Sharma mentioned all the more frightening – Apple had proudly stated that you don’t have to learn, read or even think anymore with the existence of AI tools.

Obviously, this poses a massive threat to writing. But with the new methods suggested in the video of how to relearn writing, it’s clear that there’s a way to navigate our learning within the age of AI. I personally think students should learn how to write the way people have been learning to write long before AI, except we should also make the students aware of AI and its abilities. We should all learn that using AI to save time does not benefit anyone. In fact, it supports the idea that Dr. Zamora was warning about in the video – the replacement of human skills and nature with machine.

Part Two: Is AI Sentient?

In our previous class, we discussed the question of whether AI is sentient, and we all mainly agreed that it is not. We see AI as nothing more than a tool that enhances human productivity and assists us to our every need. We control AI, but the more we command from it, the more we rely on it, until the technology consumes us and takes over (in a metaphorical sense).

Just recently, I watched an extraordinary film called Companion. It follows a couple, Iris and Josh, as they spend a getaway with Josh’s friends at a mansion in the woods. The catch? Iris is a robot. While the film is an absolutely mind-blowing allegory for misogyny and the emotional abuse of women from unstable and often evil men, using robots as a metaphor for people (can be anyone – there is a male robot in the film as well) who are stuck in controlled relationships was a rather interesting choice. Throughout the film, I picked up on the more subtle themes of how humans control AI, and what happens when they allow them to be self-aware.

Iris and [SPOILER] are both “companion bots” who end up both being literally manipulated by Josh. Iris spends the film figuring out her identity and autonomy after discovering who – or what – she really is. While the robot analogy really shines some light of accuracy in the film’s pro-feminist message, is it a good representation of AI and its “sentience?” What happens if we do let AI do everything for us? Will they become sentient in a way and take over the world like a lot of movies suggest? One can view Companion as a cautionary tale for the overuse of AI (although this conflicts with the pro-feminist message that makes us root for Iris). Either way, humans are the problem.

Going back to intention and writing, if we let AI write for us, we won’t need to think. We must know how to regulate our education of writing and the balance of the craft in the world of AI. Failure to do so may result in a global reliance of the machine. AI may not be sentient, but with enough reliance on it, AI will think for us. It will do for us. And that’s what would make AI sentient.

If you have time (and are okay with gory slashers), please check out Companion on Prime Video. The film stars Sophie Thatcher (she’s kind of my celeb crush- wait who said that) and Jack Quaid.

PS – I didn’t realize this until I saw a Letterboxd review for the film – ‘Iris’ is an anagram for ‘Siri.’ That’s insanely genius.

student blogs

Blog Post #9 Article Reactions

Song of the Day: Jordan Schor & Harley Bird – Home (NCS)

After reading the two articles on DND, I have a better understanding on the tabletop game and what surrounds it.

With the first article, “4 Reasons to Start Playing Dungeons and Dragons with Your Colleagues”, I thought it was a nice read. I have heard of DND before and am interested in it, however I do feel intimidated by how much there is involved. Reading the article did help when stating there is a role for everyone and it is meant to be an inclusive space. I can see how DND is more than just a game, it is a way for bonds to be formed and proper communication and imagination to be exercised.

In the second article, “Why AI Dungeon Is Not the AI Dungeon Master You’re Looking For” I have a couple of thoughts. While I am interested in DND, I have never really explored it so my knowledge on it is relatively low. However, I do wonder if incorporating AI in DND defeats the purpose of the creativity involved in DND. The article does make a mention of a video game that they really enjoyed and, from my understanding, wanted to combine DND and the video game together. So a question I do have is if it’s not allowed to create a DND tournament that takes place within the story or environment of an already existing franchise. As for the concept of an AI DND, the one small benefit I could see from it is being a good beginner for someone just starting to get into DND, maybe it could feel less intimidating compared to diving into a group that has years of experience.

student blogs

Blog Post #8 Video Reaction

Song of the Day: Andrew Arcadi – Leaderboard

Watching the video “Researchers Writing With(out) AI” I had a few points that I really gravitates towards.

Starting is the different purposes of writing, with was discussed in the beginning first in a broad sense. One of the examples listed is note taking; and I find that interesting because it is so simple. Note taking is technically something AI can do, but the hidden beauty is someone taking their own notes is formatting it in a way that is best for them to understand. Not everyone takes down notes the same, so each technique can be unique.

Another point was brought up during the interactive activities; “What tasks involve minimal or no risk when you write with AI?”. I think it is an important question because there are moments where you wouldn’t want someone using AI. Setting aside personal opinions of using AI in general, there is still a different between a student using AI to outline or write the first half of an essay versus a doctor using AI to summarize their patient’s medical notes/history.

The last point I want to bring up from the video is changing the perspective on “dumb” tasks. When it comes to seemingly easy and simple tasks, some might find it easier to have AI do it for them. However, if the thinking on that is changed to the opportunity to learn a simple skill, the task doesn’t feel so dumb anymore. I believe having AI to the easy work takes the opportunity away from a person to learn those skills in order to complete the tasks. If AI were to suddenly disappear, a person could have a slightly harder time completing the “easy” steps compared to someone who is used to doing it themselves.

student blogs

What are my students learning from A.I?

Listening to the Harvard EdCast conversation with Ying Xu felt a little like someone describing my classroom from the outside. Not the preschool part, obviously, but the bigger reality she names: AI is already part of how young people interact with the world. Whether it is asking SIRI a question, doomscrolling through the continuous YouTube recommendations, or opening ChatGPT/ CoPilot/ Gemini to “just check something,” students are already practicing relationships with AI. School did not start that relationship. We just walked in after it already began.

One thing Xu emphasizes is that learning is deeply social. Children develop language, understanding, and thinking through interactions with other people. Parents, teachers, peers. That point really stuck with me because as a teacher I see the difference immediately when students talk things through with another person. When they explain an idea out loud, challenge a classmate, or ask a follow-up question, the learning becomes visible. AI can simulate parts of that process. It can ask questions and offer hints. Xu even notes that some studies show children comprehend stories better when AI pauses to ask questions during reading.

But she also makes something clear that feels important for educators to hold onto. AI can support learning, but it does not replace the depth of human conversation. In her studies, children still talked more, asked more questions, and drove conversations further when speaking with a person instead of AI. That lines up with what I see with my own students. AI might get them started, but real understanding usually shows up when they have to defend an idea to someone else in the room.

Another part of the conversation that felt very familiar was the discussion about trust. Xu explains that children, like adults, often judge information based on whether a source has been correct before. If AI gave them a good answer once, they tend to trust it again. The problem is that generative AI blends information together in a way that hides where it came from. Unlike a Google search, there are no visible sources. It just presents a confident answer.

From a classroom perspective, that confidence is the real trick. Students see a clean paragraph and assume the thinking behind it must be just as solid. I have watched students bring in AI-generated essays, research questions, or thesis statements that sound polished but fall apart the moment you ask a follow-up question. The issue is not that they are trying to cheat every time. Sometimes they genuinely believe the tool “knows.”

Xu calls the skill needed to navigate this AI literacy, and that idea connects directly to conversations teachers are already having. Students need to know how these tools work, but they also need to know their limits. AI can remix information. It cannot understand context, intent, or truth the way a person can.

What I appreciated most about Xu’s perspective is that she does not frame AI as something schools should simply fear or ban. Instead she suggests something more realistic. AI should support learning, not replace human interaction. That distinction matters. Students might brainstorm with AI, check an idea, or explore a topic. But the deeper learning still happens when they wrestle with ideas themselves and discuss them with others.

There is still a bigger picture here; AI blurs boundaries. When something talks like a person, it becomes easy to forget that it is still just a program. Xu argues that helping children maintain that boundary is important. Students should know they are interacting with a tool, not a relationship.

That idea connects strongly to how I think about AI in school. Technology has always come with waves of excitement and panic. We saw it with television, smartphones, and social media. AI feels like the next version of that same cycle. The difference is that this technology interacts with students in ways that feel conversational and intelligent.

Because of that, simply telling students “don’t use it” is not going to work. They already are. The real question for schools is whether we help them understand it.

For me, that means teaching students to slow down and question what they see. Where might this information come from? Does it match what we already know? What might be missing? Those small pauses in thinking matter. Xu mentions research showing that even simple prompts encouraging students to reflect on credibility can help them evaluate information more critically.

In many ways, the goal is not to eliminate AI from learning but to make students more aware of how they are using it. AI can support curiosity, help students explore ideas, and sometimes provide scaffolding when they are stuck. But it cannot replace the messy process of thinking through a problem, discussing it with others, and arriving at an understanding that actually belongs to the student.

The conversation also reminded me of something teachers know well. Children do not develop in isolation. They exist within families, classrooms, and communities. Technology shapes their experiences, but the people around them shape how they interpret those experiences.

So the real challenge is not raising a generation that can simply use AI. It is raising a generation that can question it, understand it, and keep their human connections at the center of learning. AI might be everywhere now, but the most meaningful learning still happens when students talk, argue, laugh, and think together in a room.

student blogs

Ipad Babies!

My youngest sister, like many of the modern world’s children, was given my parents phone to endlessly scroll and click on youtube videos with very sketchy and concerning thumbnails (which is how she first interacted with AI—Youtube’s auto recommendation) from a very young age (I’d like to say around a year old, but honestly could be younger). I would sit and watch her kind of lose herself in the device. No silly conversations in the car or at the dinner table. No, time to even think to say “thank you.” She’d just sit there, glued to her screen. 

When I was a waitress, there was this regular family of four that would always sit, order, and lay out their devices in front of them (the entire time). The dad had his phone leaning on the salt shaker, the mom on the sugar caddy, and the children had their 13 inch IPads propped up by bright blue cushioning cases made perfectly for occasions as such. 

It was depressing. 

And it was even more so when I imagined my family reflecting this kind of, in my opinion, humanless image. Which in turn, fueled a lot of effort into limiting my sisters free range access to the internet. (To make a long story short, I now have paternal control of her devices (1hr on youtube kids, free reign on Disney Plus—trying to get her cultured—and PBS kids…and yes, she gets off those too…willingly). 

Unfortunately, lots of kids are not being limited. They’re glued to their screens every moment it’s available to them. We see it all the time. Kids following around their parents at the grocery store, bumping into things because they’re on their devices. Kids sitting in shopping carts, in their strollers, in high chairs at restaurants, I could go on.

Thinking of a future where kids have access to use AI is just a frightening thing to imagine. Of course we want to have kids find answers to all their curiosities, but I don’t think AI would truly work to their benefit. Technology is addictive. We’ve seen it so much amongst children, we coined a name for them: IPad Babies. 

As we learned from Childhood Development in the Emerging AI Landscape, human to human conversation is critical for a child’s social and language development. They’re more likely to be engaged in conversation when they are talking to humans. They’re more likely to ask follow up questions and share their own thoughts. They’re more likely to learn about social etiquette (basic formalities like saying “thank you” and “please”) from a human being than an AI chatbox. Meaning they’re more likely to find importance in building a sense of community. Find importance in connecting with people beyond the give and take of day to day life.

I mean, critical thinking is such an important thing to develop from a very young age!!!  

Developing “interventions,” as Ying Xu suggests doing, amidst a child’s conversation with AI seems really practical to me, but really futile at the same time, because I think they’ll just grow up and learn that ChatGPT (or similar AI) won’t annoy them with questions to get them thinking. They’ll insert their prompts to cut the “conversation” short and use something that will quickly give them an answer. They’re pick whatever keeps them far from any struggle

See, the problem is that, no matter the benefits, once a device lands in a child’s hand, their world grows out of it.

I think we should scare them. Make a powerpoint with real scary images warning them of the consequences of using AI. Show them deforestation and high electricity bills. Show them how their future careers will actually look when they reach adulthood and dissociative disorders. Show them sad polar bears floating on the scarce amount of bergy bits left.

Of course, I’m only joking (…kinda).

sorry this was late, forgot to click twice when publishing!!!

student blogs

Our best and worst attribute

Well, chapter seven was a read.

This time, I can thank Aiden for saying that “no generational narrative is universal” (though that was probably said by someone more knowledgeable before); it felt as if all generations were sitting down at a table, and Aiden opened up the library.

All the talk on Baby Boomers made me think of the fact that we’ve been governed by them for so many decades with no sign of a change. Aiden’s read makes mention of Baby Boomers’ traits that explain why we are in a toxic 4-year-long (hopefully, not longer) relationship with a narcissistic prick. The privileged Boomers that have been governed did indeed “deep investments in the promises of progress and prosperity of modernity,” and it rewarded them “with opportunities to achieve, accumulate, and succeed.” Green by their power, it is natural that they don’t want to let it go. Obsessed with themselves, they seek glory and fame. As modernity collapses and their promises go to shreds, they taught a culture of “productivity, individualism, and external validation” to achieve the American Dream. To achieve success like theirs.

We wanted it, and we bought it.

The refusal, and lack of ability, to adapt to and at modernity’s speed, leaves us inside a middle floor of a crashing building. Of course, these kids are entitled; of course, they don’t care about authority. Those in authority positions have been making a fool of themselves and of their people for decades, and despite their “best” attempts, modern society suffers like no other. And I know that statistically speaking, we are living in better times than those of the past, but why does it feel so heavy then? Why is it almost impossible to deal with regular life struggles, and we crash out for the dumbest shit? All possible answers lead to a common ground in my head: technology. Global communication is our best and worst achievement. It allowed us to be more connected, but also a medium for segregation, discrimination, and global culture standards.

Reading about Gen A made me sad. I could see my little cousins, nephews, and nieces in almost all the traits Aiden used to define that generation, and most of those traits were directly influenced by technology and modernity’s speed. So, should we put a halt to it? Should we really deny the promise of possibility for current reality, and try to solve our current issues through different means?

I don’t know.

How am I supposed to know? How could anyone know?

The only things I see for certain are that we must learn and master what we currently have, so yes, we should be teaching from early education AI systems; we need a reform of local and global ethics; and we are in desperate need of real connection, not a virtual one, rather mental and physical. We need to be able to define our identity, beliefs, and goals by our own means, and we need to exchange physically, whether that is through the exchange of knowledge, non-verbal cues, feeling the blow of the wind, or poking a friend’s shoulder (not on Facebook -.-).

We cannot keep on depending on technology, and we can not stop existing because of it.

student blogs

blog 5

I always thought politeness was just, like, some sorta strange social construct. I figured, we say “bless you,” “thank you,” and “pass the salt- please” not necessarily because it is good or helpful too, but because likely some very old person (man) a long long time ago decided we must all sorta pass down these rules and instill them – the kinda rules that if you break them there is not some direct legal ramification BUTTT big time social ones. These are strange rules that vary from culture to culture but are usually regarded and held dearly by those who honor them- because he said so.

And maybe that is true, that we are polite and well-mannered because someone, somewhere along the way decided that’s the way it would be. That’s ok. I like being polite.

Or maybe, it’s something deeper. In a culture that now, more than ever before, is swarmed with faceless people, blinding screens, and flash judgements made based on numbers and followers- our manners, politeness, and small little kind acts- may be the one shred of gratitude we have holding our society together.

In a time when very few things feel special and sacred, when rules have been turned upside down a thousand times before by war or pandemic, we still respect and are thankful for the table we eat on. And we showcase this by covering our mouths when eating, keeping our elbows off the table, all that jazz. Or holding the door for others, something that still feels small but shows respect and appreciation for the bodies around you. Even a thank you, at the smallest or biggest task, is more than simply recognizing the act but moreso recognizing the humans behind the act, the social contract we all sign and uphold.

So- where does that come into play with Ai??

We all speak kinda harshly to our tech. I don’t usually say “Siri, please,” and I’m sure neither do you. I bark at my car’s voice-radio-thingy, too. But, we’re all adults, we had politeness and manners and all that stuff cemented in the crevices of our minds since we were like 3 years old.

But about literal 3 year olds now….?

In the podcast, countless items were jarring and, quite honestly, made me feel a bit ill. Now, I can truly ramble for hours upon hours upon hours about how bad Ai is for kid’s literacy, critical thinking skills, whatever- but hearing about how Ai may be affecting kids’ ideas of manners is also so scary.

A lot of how we respond to others and learn manners is based on modeling and observing. Kids watch how their grown-ups interact differently with their friends, their family, retail workers, strangers, you get it. However, that is not enough; most of the time kids need to be explicitly taught a lot about manners, which can lead to tons of thought-provoking (but sometimes grueling) questions and answers (ie: “But why do I have to hold my fork LIKE THAT??!”).

I think a large portion of how we basically get kids to “buy into” this invisible social contract is through how other adults (usually those outside of their family) react to such politeness. Ever see a group of ladies lose their actual minds over a toddler waving goodbye?? Or, a waiter compliment how well a small child is behaving at a restaurant??? Even older kids, who play on sport teams, gleam when they are recognized for their great sportsmanship?? Kids eat that UP. 

Not only does positivity like this help kids buy into manners and gratitude, experts also state that it helps them become more well-liked people and better communicators. So, these kids who buy into the whole manners thing have way more friends and are way better at explaining their needs, and getting their needs met, by the adults around them.

While this may seem minor, it is honestly pivotal for a kid’s success. Being known as the kind, polite child opens a lot of doors as a 7-year-old for you, and honestly, being known as the OPPOSITE closes a lot of doors. These kids can become isolated and earn reputations of being rude or inconsiderate. This treatment, very sadly, oftentimes only fuels that kid to be even more “rude” and “mannerless” out of spite, too.

Even if they have the kindest hearts, in our society, we unfortunately see a lack of “bless you’s” and “thank you’s” over time as a lack of gratitude.

So… Ai. We bark our orders at them. So do our kiddos. They don’t really stop and ask follow up questions, don’t stop and think how their comments made them feel (do they even understand they cannot feel???), no pleases and thank yous. I don’t really care about Alexa’s “polite mode”- manners and gratitude go beyond just a “you’re welcome”- they are a way of showing reconciliation to one’s kindness and humanity in a busy, cold world.

But sticking these kids, these total SPONGES in front of a non-human, non-grateful, non-warm robot and just HOPING they pick up of the social magic that is manners and politeness- is scary.

We dunno how far these kids will fall behind. We dunno when these skills can be picked up, and if they even would care. But, what I personally theorize, is a bit of a bleak future of these small humans.

I see a lack of caring for deciphering and following this contract, one many adults hold near and dear to their hearts. While, possibly, one day, when Gen Alpha rules the world, that will not matter much- but that is far far away.

For now, I sense, a strong divide between kids who “catch on” and kids who fall behind. All I can hope is that the adults of this world are kind to the future kids, teenagers, and young adults who do not open doors and cannot look into their eyes when speaking:/

student blogs

Making the square peg round and the Ideas of productive struggle

For this weeks readings I found two things interesting to talk about. Jill Anderson and Ying Xu’s conversation surrounding AI brought up some nice things to think about.

One thing I want to consider is when Xu was talking about how children can see benefits from interacting with AI but may miss out on important social interactions. They specifically brought up the idea of introducing manners to kids through their time with people. I thought it was pretty funny learning that Amazon is “softening” their ai’s by adding a thank you and your welcome to a couple of interactions.

“For example, Amazon’s Echo Dot has introduced a “polite mode,” where if a child says “please” when asking a question, Alexa will respond with “thank you for asking so nicely.” So it could be a step in the right direction. But it also poses a risk of obscuring, from the children’s perspective, the boundaries between AI and humans”

(Its funny that they probably spent a good amount of money just to do this) This made me think of the analogy of forcing a square shape in a round peg. Sure AI can be helpful and be a nice tool but there has be a line in the sand. AI’s aren’t people, so they cannot be expected to properly develop children and their early skills. To me it just sounds like their shaving the shape just to fit into the peg. AI cannot replace humans no matter how hard you try. Regardless,

Now the second thing I wanted to talk about was another point that Xu made surrounding the idea productive struggle.

“But there is still the question of how much scaffolding AI should provide.
Sometimes it is not necessarily a bad thing for students who get stuck on a problem and work through it for an extended period. This is a kind of struggle that we wanted to call “productive struggling.” It’s helpful for the learning, as it creates space and time for students to construct their own understanding.”

This really struck a cord with me. I will admit that I am a pretty lazy person. If there is an easy way of doing something, I will take that 8 times out of 10, but there has to be some kind of line in the sand. I honestly still think that there should be some struggle, specifically when you get into producing work. Whats the point of writing if there isn’t some kind of hardship. I can understand that AI can be there to help and assist at times, but I do feel that struggle is a required part of the process. To me its part of the deal we make when we want to create. For something to exist, there has to be some sort of effort to be put into it. The lesson of struggle is something I feel all student should feel. When they hit a road block, there has to be some thought put into to find a way through. Again, AI can be a tool to guide them and give them some ideas, but it shouldn’t be used as a catchall pathfinder.