AI Will Set Education Back 2500 Years... And That’s a Good Thing | Robert Clapperton | TEDxUW

Robert Clapperton shares why generative AI will set education back 2500 years, and why that’s a good thing. Robert presents an optimistic perspective, suggesting that AI can revolutionize education by creating a digital extension of teachers. Robert Clapperton is an Assistant Professor in the School of Professional Communications at Ryerson University. Robert earned his PhD in English Language and Literature with a Graduate Diploma in Cognitive Science at the University of Waterloo. He specializes in computational linguistics with an emphasis on the critical application of natural language processing in education. Robert’s teaching focuses on the digital enterprise and communication research methods.
Robert is a co-founder and inventor of Ametros Learning, a natural language understanding experiential learning platform focused on the teaching and practicing communication, critical thinking, and emotional intelligence. The platform is currently used by universities, corporations, and professional associations across North America. This talk was given at a TEDx event using the TED conference format but independently organized by a local community. Learn more at www.ted.com/tedx

[@juliocesarsalazargarcia6872]

People keep forgeting that ChatGpt hallucinates, that is a yet unsolved problem. Also, socratic dialogue depends on good questions, and most students still don't know how to ask GOOD questions without the help of a good guide (that does not hallucinate) and without legit curiosity.

[@wikath449]

Adding to my former Comment: Most Teens today (I am talking as a father + experience from my wife a High-School Teacher) don´t even know how to use GOOGLE-Search properly (for more than "ticket- event, or product-search). Most of them are lost when it comes to evaluate the ensuing results for their own problem-solving or knowledge enhancement. Now, give them a Tool that is not only a "tool" - but in fact "a magic wand" that is so much smarter than they are, my assumption is, that the magic wand is eventually turning the (student/teacher) relationship upside-down - like it happens in the famous German poem "Der Zauberlehrling" - Alas, today, we don´t have "a Grand Master" that eventually comes around to rescue the "uninitiated apprentice"...

[@user-gg8we2ot4b]

I agree.

[@kindagoodatthegame]

I don’t want back those years i studied

[@wikath449]

Sorry - I disagree. (Subject - Object Merge / It is as if you are talking almost to yourself) - yes, if this were not about Education but rather about "S.." I would call it "Mast....". Contrary to what you say, I argue that AI-based learning is mostly for the "100 already engaged students" - the ones who ALREADY talk with you - because for them, it is valuable and complementary. The other 100 (who only show up for the assessment) will not even utilize it. It is too anonymous to even care about it. AI by itself (and its valuable offerings and interactions) will not MOTIVATE (a few) of these loosely-engaged 100. True Learning (imho) is as much about the student/teacher-relationship - or actor/audience-relationship or observer/nature-relationship (i.e. about an Intimacy-feedback loop) - as much as it is about the content itself. And while AI is by its intent, moving the subject-matter-interaction from the "Attention-Level" to the"Intimacy-Level" it is exactly that: an ARTIFICIAL Intimacy. So my assumption is: An Artificial Intimacy will not engage the "non-engaged". It will eventually lead to widening (!) the gap between the educated and the non-educated. the already educated will use it as a complement - and the others will be the AI-slaves.

[@MaxWinner]

Excellent point

[@MaxWinner]

How do you think we could get around this? Any hypothetical solutions?

[@ghostknock7663]

Another person who’s never taught with advice on how to revolutionize our current system. We’ve actually had people like you revolutionizing the model for 20 years at least. Like drastic changes, and it has made schools so much worse. So will AI