Every few years a brand new technology appears on the doorsteps of colleges and universities promising to remodel education. The latest? Technologies and apps that include or are based on generative artificial intelligence, also generally known as GenAI.
These technologies are sold based on their potential for education. For example, the founding father of Khan Academy opened his 2023 Ted Talk by arguing, “We are on the verge of harnessing AI for perhaps the greatest positive transformation education has ever seen.”
As optimistic as these visions of the longer term could also be, the truth of educational technology in recent many years has not lived as much as its promise. Rigorous examinations of 1 technology at a time – from mechanical machines To computersout of mobile devices To massive open online courses or MOOCs – have noted the continued failures of technology to remodel education.
Still, educational technology evangelists forgotten, remaining unconscious or just not caring about it. Or they’re too optimistic that the following recent technology shall be different than before.
As vendors and startups pitch their AI-powered products to varsities and universities, educators, administrators, parents, taxpayers, and others should ask questions informed by prior evidence before making purchasing decisions.
As a long-time researcher who investigates New technology in educationHere are five questions I believe ought to be answered before school officials purchase AI-based technologies, apps, or platforms.
1. What educational problem does the product solve?
One of a very powerful questions educators should ask is whether or not technology is making an actual difference within the lives of scholars and teachers. Is the technology an answer to a particular problem or is it an answer in quest of an issue?
To make this concrete, consider the next: Imagine purchasing a product that uses GenAI to reply course-related questions. Does this product meet a recognized need or is it being introduced into the environment just because it might probably now perform that function? To answer such questions, schools and universities should conduct Needs analyseswhich may also help them discover their most pressing concerns.
2. Is there evidence that a product works?
There remains to be no convincing evidence of the impact of GenAI products on educational outcomes. That results in some researchers to encourage education policymakers to delay purchasing products until such evidence is accessible. Others suggest What matters is whether or not the design of the product is predicated on basic research.
Unfortunately, there isn’t any central source of product information and reviews, so the responsibility for product review lies with the patron. My suggestion is to think about a pre-GenAI suggestion: ask vendors to supply independent and third-party studies on their products, but Use multiple methods to evaluate the effectiveness of a product. This includes reports from colleagues and first evidence.
Don’t accept reports that describe the potential advantages of GenAI – what you really need is what actually happens when the precise app or tool is utilized by teachers and students in the sector. Be looking out for unfounded allegations.
3. Did educators and students help develop the product?
Often there’s a “Gap between what entrepreneurs are building and what educators need.” This results in products which are disconnected from the truth of teaching and learning.
For example, a shortcoming One laptop per child program – an ambitious program that aimed to place small, low-cost but sturdy laptops within the hands of youngsters from lower-income families – is that the laptops were designed for that idealized younger versions of the developers themselvesnot a lot the youngsters who actually used them.
Recognizing this gap, some researchers have developed initiatives involving entrepreneurs and educators work together To Improving educational technology products.
FatCamera
Questions to ask providers might include: How have educators and learners been involved? What impact did their input have on the ultimate product? What were their biggest concerns and the way were those concerns addressed? Were they representative of the various groups of scholars who might use these tools, including by way of age, gender, race, ethnicity, and socioeconomic background?
4. What educational beliefs shape this product?
Educational technology is rarely neutral. It is designed by people, and folks have beliefs, experiences, ideologies and biases that shape the technologies they develop.
It is significant for educational technology products to do that Support the varieties of learning environments educators strive for for his or her students. Questions to ask include: What pedagogical principles guide this product? What particular varieties of learning does this support or discourage? You don't should be satisfied with generalities similar to a theory of learning or epistemology.
5. Does the product level the playing field?
Finally, one should ask how a product eliminates educational inequalities. Will this technology help reduce learning gaps between different learning groups? Or does it help some learners? often those that are already successful or privileged – but not others? Does it take an asset-based or deficit-based approach to addressing inequalities?
Education technology vendors and startups may not have answers to all of those questions. But they need to still be asked and brought into consideration. Answers could lead on to improved products.
image credit : theconversation.com