This article draws from a UNESCO report to assert that "in a world where GenAI is becoming part of learning, work, and professional practice, the enduring contribution of colleges and universities is designing learning environments that support the development of those capabilities while creating opportunities for that development to become visible and recognized." Which is fair enough. But the intent is to offer the always reassuring statement that "These questions do not require us to abandon familiar educational practices. In many cases, they simply invite us to build on what already exists." The questions in question invite the learner to reflect on their own learning - to ask, for example, "what evidence or counter-argument changed your thinking?" or "Which suggestion did you reject and why?". And they invite instructors to ask things like "What distinctly human capabilities are important for learners to develop?" None of this embraces the possibility that learners ill need to learn different things than they did before AI, and that as a result what we teach, how we teach, and why we tech may be fundamentally altered.
Today: Total: [Direct link] [Share]
