What part should Generative AI play in Education?

The first of two models to help you frame what part GAI should play in our world of teaching and learning.

This is one of the lessons in a new free course of mine recently released on EduSpark:

Before diving into where AI fits in the world of education, I want to position the deep and impactful value that our best teachers bring to classrooms.

What makes an outstanding teacher?

John Corrigan, a good friend of mine and a masterful thought leader in education, has built a body of work around understanding the differences between the average teacher and those inspirational educators that have so much influence on the lives of students. I want to use some of his recent insights as a frame to where we should be ‘inviting’ AI to contribute, and what should remain in the domain of human teachers.

John paper, "Teacherly Authority for the Twenty-First Century," explores the impact of 'enlightened' teachers – a small group who have a lifelong impact on their students – compared to highly motivated but less impactful 'motivated' teachers. The paper delves into the concept of 'teacherly authority,' described by Zak Stein, as a critical mechanism for cultural transmission and effective education. It emphasizes the importance of establishing teacherly authority on more than just subject matter expertise, advocating for a focus on life skills and key human capacities. Corrigan suggests that by teaching and embodying these life skills, teachers can engage students more effectively and create a more positive and impactful learning environment​.

Four attributes of enlightened teachers are explored and exposed through this analysis:

1. Relevance Realisation/Insight: The ability to discern what is relevant in a given context and to gain insights, which is foundational for skills like creativity, curiosity, adaptability, and contributes to problem-solving.

2. Getting Things Done: This refers to the capability to act effectively in the world, demonstrating initiative, persistence, and the ability to lead and complete projects successfully.

3. Caring for Others: A capacity central to human health and wellbeing, focusing on developing relationships, empathy, compassion, and collaboration.

4. Active Open-Mindedness (AOM): A cognitive stance that involves being open to changing one’s mind based on evidence, critical thinking, and avoiding biases.

According to John, the 5% of teachers who operate at this enlightened level are strongly delivering all four of these attributes. Motivated (but ‘not enlightened) teachers, around 35%, are competently delivering on two. In most cases, it is Getting Things Done and one other (often Caring for Others).

It strikes me that three of these traits are (at least for the moment) entirely high value, humanly delivered traits. Caring for Others, Creating Insight and Developing Open Active Mindedness are tied deeply to the interactions and relationship formed between teacher and student. For convenience, I want to combine these under the heading of Grow Others. Out of these form trust, empathy and creativity amongst others.

For me, these two intentions help separate the where and how GAI can play a role in Education.

1. Generative AI is already competent at helping us with the Get Stuff Done game.

2. Educators and Leaders are already overwhelmed with tasks, reducing the available bandwidth to develop capabilities in the Grow People domain.

3. It will be some time before GAI can have deep developmental impact that the Grow People domain delivers.

A model for where this all fits:

I think that this better helps us define and permission a role for GAI in education.

My intention here has been to give you a frame of reference to assess what AI is bringing (opportunities and risks), and to leave you with some provocations for reflection. The four quadrants above seeks to give one possible frame to you, where we pitch ‘value’ (especially human development value) against replaceability.

1. Replaceable and Lower Value:

Imagine the countless hours educators spend on administrative tasks — scheduling, data entry, and basic record-keeping. These tasks, while necessary, don't directly contribute to student learning. AI can take over these replaceable, lower-value tasks, liberating educators to focus on more impactful work. [Take a look at https://www.magicschool.ai]

2. Irreplaceable and Lower Value:

In the day-to-day life of a school, there are numerous tasks that, while not glorified, are essential for maintaining a conducive learning environment. These include overseeing student uniform compliance, monitoring hygiene practices, and ensuring proper grooming. This quadrant highlights activities where the human presence is indispensable, not for their academic value but for their role in creating a structured, respectful, and safe educational environment. In general life, AI will likely not replace uniquely human activities such as (e.g.) grooming.

Replaceable and Higher Value:

Personalized learning algorithms offer a prime example here. They adapt to individual learning styles, offering high value in tailoring education to each student's needs. While AI can significantly enhance this personalization, it cannot replace the nuanced guidance and support a teacher provides. Arguably, GAI now can act as learning partners, coaches and mentors that allow this higher value to be delivered at scale. [Take a look at https://pi.ai/discover]

Irreplaceable and Higher Value:

The heart of education lies in fostering critical thinking, creativity, and emotional intelligence. These are skills where the human element is not just valuable, but irreplaceable. No AI can yet replicate the depth and richness of human interaction necessary to develop these competencies.

Conclusion

For me, having AI reduce educator workloads in the lower left quadrant could allow the opportunity to more extensively develop the high value, uniquely human skills that have such legacy value to students.

What are your thoughts? What would you challenge in this thinking?