Welcome! We are Daniel Edwards and Braden Holt. We’re excited to share with you our open educational resource on Classrooms of the Future! We sincerely hope you find something interesting and learn something new from our opportunity forecast. Here’s how to get started using our resource:
- Explore our website: The website has a range of growing classroom trends to explore, from AI, to security, to immersive experiences. You are welcome to explore all the trends, or find a few that interest you most. Each trend has:
- An introduction
- Informative media to consume
- A real-life example
- A discussion question
- Take the poll: The discussion page has a poll for you to share your thoughts and perspective on the trends presented.
- Reflect and discuss: Choose one or more of the suggested discussion questions (there is one for each trend) and comment below with your thoughts.
- Make sure to specify which question you are answering.
- If you see someone has already answered a discussion question that interests you, consider adding a supporting or contrasting argument.
- Feel free to post a comment unrelated to the discussion questions if any other ideas come to mind!
Click here to explore the future – Classrooms of the Future
Using systems like Google Classroom, ChatGPT, or Teams means that student data will be collected by these large corporations. In your opinion, is using these tools worth the reduction in privacy for the students? Is it worth it for you personally?
Thanks for your post and website, Braden and Daniel!
These are interesting questions that you post here, and I wonder about what questions we SHOULD be asking in addition to them? Using these tools has, I believe, enormous benefits and helps create learning environments that are usable, and beneficial. Maybe the question we should ask next is what are we (or governments) going to do about these corporations that are gathering our data, and how is the use of this data to be monitored? It might be worth it to me, for instance, to provide my data to use these tools and maybe even improve them. It is not worth it to me, however, to have those corporations selling my data and distributing it to other corporations with whom I do not want it shared.
So what could be different? I don’t have the answers – but there are certainly other ways. Imagine an internet world where users paid to access rather than it being advertising-based! There are other ways, and the ability for corporations to collect our data and perhaps use it in a non-consensual manner is one that I know is hopefully to be limited through government intervention.
For now, these tools are honestly impactful enough to me that it is indeed worth the reduction in privacy … with the caveat that I hope we can regulate its use effectively.
Hey Steve! Thanks for sharing what you have seen with these tools and the potential trade-off between privacy and the benefits they offer. It’s indeed a complex issue with no easy answers.
You raised an important question about what measures can be taken to address large corporations’ collection and use of student data. I also hope Government intervention and regulation play a crucial role in ensuring that data is handled responsibly and that individuals have control over how their data is used. Striking a balance between the benefits of these tools and protecting privacy is essential.
The other idea you mentioned, where users pay for access instead of relying on advertising-based revenue, could be one possible solution to reduce reliance on data collection for monetization purposes. Exploring different business models prioritizing user privacy and consent is an important avenue to consider.
Whether using these tools is worth the reduction in privacy is subjective and depends on individual values and priorities. Some may find the benefits outweigh the privacy concerns, while others may prefer to seek out other tools, like a paid alternative, or advocate for stronger privacy protections. It is an ongoing conversation, and it’s encouraging to see discussions around these topics taking place.
In summary, while using these tools currently provides significant benefits, it is important to address privacy concerns through effective regulation and maybe even explore alternative models that prioritize user consent and privacy.
What ethical considerations should educators take into account when using predictive analytics for early intervention, and how can they ensure that data-driven interventions are supportive rather than stigmatizing for students?
Thanks Braden and Daniel for the resource.
This questions stood out to me as I am looking at similar ethical considerations when it comes to neuroscience and AI. When thinking about the challenges educators may have when it comes to ensuring the data driven interventions are supportive rather than stigmatizing I came up with a few considerations and maybe some solutions as well
Transparency, Accountability and Informed Consent: I think educators and schools need to be very forthcoming in what data is being collected and for what and then how this could potentially affect the students. It is also important that the models and interventions suggested are easily explainable and have review mechanisms in place to check for errors. Consent should be informed and given by students and parents before collecting any data.
Avoiding Stigma and Bias : Emphasis should be put on the fact that these are predictive models only and being used as early intervention tools. This is not a definitive judgement or diagnosis of anyone’s capabilities or potential. This is one tool that can help in the overall plan for students but should not be the only method used. Educators need to be aware there are biases present in predictive data. Algorithms should be audited and updated to ensure fairness around race, gender, SES and special education stats. Using diverse data sets can help to train the model.
Here is an interesting article I found in Forbes on this topic
https://www.forbes.com/sites/audreymurrell/2019/05/30/big-data-and-the-problem-of-bias-in-higher-education/?sh=71592adb5758
Thank you for your response Meagan. I’m glad you answered this question – I was hoping someone would and your answer is very thoughtful!
You raise compelling points about the need for transparency and the importance of not ONLY relying on predictive models. The article you shared states that people tend to overly trust the output of predictive models and see the result as a ‘fact’, not realizing that the allegedly ‘fair’ model is biased by the data it was trained on.
The article you linked also has some ideas I found interesting about issues with feeding background information of students into the predictive models. According to the Forbes article, feeding background information on the race, financial status, culture, or even address can cause misleading bias in the model. I can certainly see how this could be a problem, but in that case, what information should we give the model to get the best outcome? I think it will be difficult to draw a line between “stereotyping” and “necessary information”. Should gender be included? What about previous learning designations? I suppose only careful auditing and review (as you suggested) will be able to tell us what background information is safe to include without misleading the algorithm.
Thanks for the reply. I do think there are a lot of valuable measures we can get by using AI and these predictive models but I wonder sometimes if people see it as an easier way or a shortcut when in actuality it is just as much work to set these things up in order for us to get reliable and helpful information. You bring up some great questions on what to include and what not to include and it is hard to know! I think there still is some work to be done in order to build something that can give us information that helps and doesn’t hinder. Lots to think about
Very cool resource! And a lot of interesting, thought-provoking discussion questions. I’d like to say a quick piece about this one:
As open learning resources become more readily available, what unique value can educators bring to the learning experience that technology cannot?
This is an excellent question and one that I have thought about myself at times. If and when open learning resources reach a certain level of intelligence and reliability, it’s only normal to consider what the purpose of the human educator has become. One thing that we can offer that technology cannot is important human-to-human interaction. While being the obvious answer, I believe it to be very important, especially in the earlier developmental stages of elementary and high school education. Humans have always learned how to interact with the world from other humans. And because of this, I believe there is an evolutionary aspect to the way in which humans derive understanding and knowledge.
An example of where human educators might have the advantage would be something like social and emotional learning. While I’m sure ChatGPT can provide excellent information on how to promote SEL, it certainly doesn’t provide the level of empathy and compassion that exists between the human educator and student. The only scenario in which I can see this becoming overturned is when the open learning resources start creating the Ex Machina humanoid robot educators that utilize the humanity aspect of learning… But until then, I believe educators still have value in the learning experience.
Hey Nik! Thank you for sharing! I agree that human-to-human interaction is crucial to education, particularly in the early developmental stages.
One area where human educators have an advantage is in social and emotional learning (SEL). While technology, such as ChatGPT, can provide information on promoting SEL, it lacks empathy and compassion in the relationship between a human educator and a student. The ability of educators to understand and respond to the emotional needs of students is an invaluable aspect of the learning experience.
Of course, it is possible that in the future, advanced technology may develop humanoid robot educators that can replicate the human aspect of learning. However, until that becomes a reality, human educators continue to play a vital role in providing a holistic and empathetic learning experience that technology cannot fully replicate.
I have the same sentiment as Nik. Human-to-human interaction is still very important. Positive social connections are important to the well being of humans in general and education should be part of that. Learning is also very social in nature. I personally remember the stories that my teachers told in class and that’s what makes a topic more interesting. Not only do we learn from the instructors but also, we learn from our peers.
I’m also thinking about specific subjects and how open learning resources can’t meet all the “learning specifications” of students. I think language learning needs some kind of social interaction. Speaking is a skill that needs to be practiced with a speaker of that specific language either in person or online. Open educational resources can teach grammar or vocabulary, but the conversational turn taking can never be fulfilled by static text.
Educators in the language learning field are quite valuable in error correction. Basic error correction like grammar and simple vocabulary usage can probably be done by machines but the higher level semantic mistakes that students make can only be corrected by teachers in class.
If we go on YouTube, any polyglot out there will go out of their way to talk to native speakers to maintain their language proficiency or just learn more from others in general. Technology is a great tool to help with learning, but actual teachers are invaluable resources.
Hi all,
I believe that educators bring unique value to the learning experience that technology cannot replicate, including personalized guidance tailored to individual learning styles, emotional support to motivate and engage students, and the ability to contextualize learning within real-world applications. Sure we might be headed towards an artifical intelligence that can do these things, but I think that we are able to see multiple dimensional pathways if we need to make quick modifications in the environments that we find ourselves. A simple example would be perhaps guiding a disregulated student back into a regulated state. A machine might not be able to calmly guide a student towards alternative tasks, or use the resources that are in that box on that shelf they remember the student really likes to engage with. As educators we can guide critical thinking and problem-solving skills through interactive discussions and challenge students to think beyond the information presented on the fly in a much more creative capacity that what currently technology and generative AI models can produce. Additionally, educators share their personal interests and experiences, enriching the learning journey with their passion and insight. If A student comes to class with an AC/DC shirt on, I can build rapport with that student by talking about that one time I saw AC/DC or what thier favourite song is. This level of empathy and understanding doesn’t really emerge with current technologies. While open learning resources and AI offer vast information, the personal touch, contextual understanding, and emotional engagement provided by educators are irreplaceable, making them indispensable in facilitating a comprehensive and transformative educational experience.
Well written, Bianca, Bradley, and Nik.
I agree with all of you that this “singularity,” or point when artificial intelligence could become more intelligent than humans, as questioned by Reedy in 2017, is not very near. As Allen and Greaves also mentioned, human intelligence has a lot of complexity that can not be simply recreated very quickly (2011).
Well written, and I give points to all of you. I would also like to give bonus points to Bradley for mentioning AC/DC.
Allen, P. G., & Greaves, M. (2011, October 12). Paul Allen: The Singularity Isn’t Near. MIT Technology Review. https://www.technologyreview.com/2011/10/12/190773/paul-allen-thesingularity-
isnt-near/.
Reedy, C. (2017, October 6). Kurzweil Claims That the Singularity will Happen by 2045. Futurism. https://futurism.com/kurzweil-claims-that-the-singularity-will-happen-by-2045.
Daniel and Braden, I really enjoyed browsing the resource you created for this assignment. I especially valued the variety of themes to explore and the quantity of questions posed to guide our critical thinking.
I want to respond to the section on adaptive learning. Pranav compares current models of education to the outlandish idea that a doctor would be calling all their patients into the office at once, diagnosing, and trying to make a prescription that fits all. He is suggesting that adaptive learning is going to be more like the personal approach we have to medicine. This analogy makes sense, but neglects to capture the idea that there are general rules for health that fit everyone as well. Eating non-processed foods, exercising daily, and avoiding smoking are all general prescriptions that can be followed by everyone to achieve a positive baseline of health. In the same way that apps like MyFitnessPal or FitBod can apply adaptive health principles specific to the individual, adaptive educational tools can work to improve students beyond the general age-level curriculum or work to identify and close the gaps in student learning. This does not negate the benefits of general health advice or the benefits of community learning in a classroom.
Question:
– As learning becomes more personalized and individualized, how do you think educators will prevent a loss of collaboration and teamwork opportunities among students?
I think educators will have to leveraging adaptive learning to benefit collaboration and teamwork opportunities. Adaptive learning technologies have potential to help our students in many different aspects of curriculum and development by tailoring experiences to improve students beyond their grade levels or by working to assess and reduce gaps in a student’s learning. Collaboration and teamwork are still integral 21st century learning skills, but perhaps adaptive learning offers education a chance to re-think our application of group/team activities and place a higher value on teaching the explicit strategies to succeed in them.
By offering students personalized learning opportunities to improve, we might be giving them a chance to succeed better during collaborative tasks. Students may feel more confident in using their learning if the adaptive technologies are working to address their needs in a personal way. Educators or even students might also use the insights from these technologies to better understand their own strengths and highlight what they can offer to a group during collaborative activities, or even what they stand to learn from. Adaptive technologies might also be leveraged by teams as a whole to give specific and timely feedback on their thoughts, ideas, and products. When we think about learning through teaching, adaptive technology insights may also give space to educators to purposefully pair/group students with others to foster positive peer relationships.
Hi Andrew,
Thank you for checking out our resource and for your interesting ideas. I really like your point that in medicine and education, there are generally beneficial things that work for everyone. In both industries, we could argue that for most people those general good habits could have even a larger impact on well being than treating individual issues. However, for some people with serious health or learning difficulties, a more individualized treatment may be required to improve well being. What a great analogy you’ve shared.
I also appreciate your comment that individual learning may lead to better collaboration. If outliers who were not getting enough support can use the adaptive learning technology to catch up a little, and give them confidence from making progress, I feel you would be correct that students would be more confident in a group activity. Also, your last sentence about teachers using insights to make decisions (such as grouping students) is exactly what I hope to see in the future. With more data available, educators can make more informed decisions to better support their students.
Hi folks. Thanks for the presentation. I’m just working my way through it and wanted to respond to the first question breifly.
As learning becomes more personalized and individualized, how do you think educators will prevent a loss of collaboration and teamwork opportunities among students?
I just had the thought that perhaps if all students are enrolled within an institutional setting for example, or are working under the same software umbrella, perhaps the engine running it could identify which students are at the same or similar levels for creating pairings and partnerships. This could even go one step further to create unequal pairings based on other characteristics like personality or interests better implement social constructivst learning philosphies.
Hi Bradley!
Thank you for your response. I think that’s a great idea you presented. Leveraging technology and the institutional setting to facilitate pairings and partnerships among students based on their levels and other characteristics like personality and interests could enhance the implementation of a social constructivist approach.
I guess while gathering the data to implement a pairing based on criteria, the students’ personal information will need to be safeguarded. For example, in one of my programs, levels are assessed for the students, and that is used to determine groupings for reading activities. While this data is still private, it is also safeguarded.
Your idea shows a thoughtful approach to fostering collaboration and implementing social constructivist philosophies in an appropriate setting.
If you could choose one historical figure for your students to have a conversation with, who would you choose and why? What would you hope your students would learn from the experience?
I think I would probably introduce them to Ghandi in hopes that they would be come more aware of their actions and the consequences that it has on other people – to have an increased perception of value of others and to see them more equitably and equally and to promote nonviolence. This is with the concern that being too plugged in can create social disconnection and the veil of an avatar and username creating conditions for verbal violence.
Hey Bradley,
I agree with that pick and the reason behind it. The cause-and-effect violence harkens me to our readings on Bandura’s Bobo Doll Experiment in 512. While watching violent actions and then engaging in those in another topic, especially concerning kids, I agree that the social disconnection and anonymity online could allow for rude behaviour online, and it is something we could learn from a virtual historical figure such as Ghandi or others.
As learning becomes more personalized and individualized, how do you think educators will prevent a loss of collaboration and teamwork opportunities among students?
Personalized learning shouldn’t come at the expense of social connection and collaborative opportunities. Personalized learning should be both personal and social. Educators have a responsibility to ensure that collaboration and teamwork opportunities are available to the students, even when learning is personalized and individualized. Here are a few examples of how this can be done:
• Sharing work – Students can learn valuable knowledge from one another as they share their work. After working independently, they can come together and collaborate.
• Group work – Personalized learning can take place within group work when each student can focus on aspects of the project that can meet their individual learning needs.
Hi Emma,
I absolutely agree! Educators should prioritize collaboration and teamwork opportunities while implementing personalized and individualized learning. Educators create an environment that fosters social connections and knowledge exchange by encouraging students to share their work and collaborate with their peers. Including group work that aligns with the student’s individual learning needs and allows personalized learning within a collaborative context. I think educators should balance personalization and social interaction to ensure that students can benefit from both aspects of their educational experience.
What role will gamification play in personalizing the learning experience and catering to individual student needs and learning styles in your classroom?
To call a spade a spade: ALL OF MY STUDENTS PLAY GAMES! Also, to be perfectly honest, I teach in a school that has a LOT of needs. From my experience and observation, gamification has the ability to, initially at least, generate student interest. It is at a point like this that students can start taking an interest and find a new way to engage in the course content. Gamification is something that I have a huge interest in, having played video games for the greater part of my life. The future of gamification is virtually limitless, and it can assist students in so many creative ways to adapt learning to their abilities. For some students, this may mean “gamifying” a lesson to a point where it enhances their curiosity and inherently makes them want to explore more of the content. Also, when considering the ability to adapt gamification, I have a lot of students at my school that require other needs to assist in their learning. Adaptable gamification can assist these students in their learning journey, and again, allow them to be able to better retain newly learned information.
As gamification is something that I am studying, I will admit that my current knowledge in how best to implement this in my classroom is very limited. I have a wild imagination, but that is also my greatest limiter. I look forward to what the future holds, to see what innovators can come up with, to see what I may be able to, one day hopefully, use in my room to make the course content more attainable to my students.
Hey Adam,
Thank you for your reply! Your firsthand experience and observation of students’ interest sparked through gamification is truly valuable. You recognize the potential of gamification to engage students and adapt learning to their unique needs and abilities. From my experience, the limitless possibilities of gamification offer exciting opportunities for developing creativity and encouraging the exploration of course content in an engaging manner. It’s inspiring to see your dedication to making course content more accessible to your students. I would also like to mention that there are many courses in the MET program that have gamification elements within it, including this course and 523, with 523 having an emphasis on mobile gaming. There is also a course that solely focuses on game-based learning, but I will have to look up its course number.
Hey guys, thanks for putting this together! I really enjoyed the section of Privacy and Security as it’s always been a factor in how I use social media and media in general for my music program.
I went with “To what level does the classroom of the future need to invest in security?”
As we grow in education and in technology, security I feel is important to any user. With cases of fraud on the rise or even the ability to steal an identity, I feel security is a service that most people would still rely on. It’s all about trust. In regards to level, I would say that it would be pretty close to what is currently in place. FOIPPA, is in place to protect people’s personal information. In the classroom, I always have to be on the alert when using social media to promote my music program. For example, if the student does not want to be publicized on our school website, the picture or article doesn’t go up. Another factor which was mentioned in the OER was the use of AI. AI has been a hot topic and I will admit, it is amazing what it can do so far; but what isn’t far is how real it is getting. If AI was a big factor for security in the classroom, I guess my final answer would be very high.
– Jeremiah
Hey Jeremiah,
Thank you for your reply! I agree with you that privacy and security online are important for everyone and a great example of it, as well. There are laws in place to protect personal information, and many AI chatbots have a cut off date of when they got information for some of these reasons, but I agree it is a good idea to be protected online in case.
While adaptive learning promises personalization, could it also lead to homogenization of learning experiences and stifle critical thinking skills if not carefully implemented? How can we ensure adaptability fosters diverse perspectives and encourages student agency in the learning process?
I can see both the benefits and potential concerns of adaptive learning technologies. On the positive side, it aims to remove roadblocks for students struggling with material and challenge those who need it, building confidence in both cases.
In your question, you raise the concern that adaptive learning could homogenize experiences, which is interesting because isn’t personalization supposed to be antithetical to homogenization? Students can progress whether of a lower or a higher ability. Your summary mentioned that on the plus side, adaptive learning technologies minimize boredom and frustration. For me this raises the question of whether there is any learning value to experiences like frustration or boredom. Could they expose students to managing emotions or act as stepping stones to breakthroughs? For some, frustration might precede insight as they push through challenges. Others may get bored but use that as motivation to engage with tasks in self-directed ways.
The aim of adaptive learning seems to be continuous mastery through comfort. But is there anything to be said for complex tasks set by teachers that might seem insurmountable challenges for some students at first, while a breeze for others? Are we discouraging student independence if we are always trying to meet students where they are, instead of giving them opportunities for productive struggle?
Hi David, thank you for your comment. I see now that perhaps my discussion question was not phrased clearly so I will try to clarify.
If adaptive learning is properly implemented, it will indeed lead to supporting all students (strong and weak as you said), less boredom, and increased confidence. However, if adaptive learning is poorly implemented or overly relied upon, I believe it could lead to all students working on the same program with the same content at slightly different difficulties. Furthermore, if the program does not identify the specific skills or knowledge gaps that a student has, it could go back to ‘easier questions’ that a student has already mastered. Lastly, students are exposed in school to experiences that are below or beyond their skill level. If adaptive learning programs are overly relied upon, students might only see information that they are currently comfortable with, leading to less critical thinking opportunities. As you say, being frustrated (by something beyond your abilities) or bored (by something below your abilities) can be a valuable experience!
I hope that helps clear up what I meant by ‘homogenization of learning experiences and stifle critical thinking skills’. Cheers!
Hi Braden,
Thanks for your reply. Let’s see, I understood homogenization of learning experiences as, within the adaptive learning system, there is a continuum of mastery towards achieving a predetermined objective, and each student works at their own level/pace. By virtue of defining what these objectives are and what achieving them looks like, this could lead to an overly narrow or predetermined learning experience, which may draw all the students’ learning experiences toward something similar, hence homogenization.
I believe this is similar to what you are saying about how adaptive learning technologies could just mean “all students working on the same program with the same content at slightly different difficulties.”
But outside of the parameters of the adaptive learning progression towards the predetermined objectives, who’s to say there isn’t some other way of looking at or answering the problem, besides just meeting the predefined objectives? You might be thinking at this point that there always should be some objective or endpoint that the learner needs to reach. And in that case, adaptive learning technology isn’t doing anything differently than what good teaching is supposed to have – a clear and obtainable end point for the learner. Adaptive learning simply facilitates students getting to that endpoint through personalization.
When I asked about personalization seeming contradictory to homogenization, I wasn’t trying to imply there was any contradiction in the point you raised in your question. Rather, I was hoping to have a discussion about how, from one perspective, there could appear to be tensions between adaptive learning’s goals of personalization and the potential for homogenization. Thanks again for taking the time to respond!
Hello Daniel and Braden,
This is a really interesting topic and I think it is a way to really target students where they are instead of where they are expected to be in terms of personalization. I guess my main question for this is, how can we make sure that the information that the AI is pulling from is as inclusive as possible and that the data it derives its curriculum and answers from is based in the culture and countries it is educating in?
This is also spoken about in terms of accessibility, however, there are many many children in the world who do not have access to technology at home and this creates divides in learning and skill development. How would you suggest that this could be mitigated or implemented in older forms of technology so that it is accessible even without the newest forms of technology?
I think that it is a really fascinating conversation to have about the capabilities or possibilities in this realm you have explored, but I think it is a very idyllic way to look at the possibilities and where it could go.
Why do you think ChatGPT is so much more effective than a human tutor (as the survey suggests)?
– I honestly do not think that with its current capabilities it is better. The data it is pulling from is very euro-centric and very few perspectives have been able to be documented and used in academia. We can use chatgpt and other forms of AI for tutoring but we still need to critically analyze the information being presented and, just like a human teacher, not take all information at face value and that everything they say is factually correct.
Overall this is a great project and it really makes you think which is the purpose of these projects so thank you for all of these amazing elements of what classrooms of the future could be.
Hello Nathalie,
Thank you for your reply and your in-depth questions, as well. Unfortunately, that is a major concern that has been a problem even before AI became as widely used. Noble stated there was a strong disconnect on how certain races were displayed via search algorithms and concluded that what is displayed through the information has a lot of power (171). I think a dialogue is important to communicate more inclusive bot and to learn what is needed and what is currently in place to get children and communities in remote or less developed places able to use these more modern technologies so they can have better education prepared for future technologies.
Noble, S. (2018). Algorithms of Oppression: How Search Engines Reinforce Racism. New York, USA: New York University Press. https://doi.org/10.18574/nyu/9781479833641.001.0001
Daniel and Braden,
This is a very clean, easy to navigate and polished presentation. I really enjoyed navigating this site as it was both enlightening and thought-provoking. Your site highlighted the inevitable integration of AI into educational settings and classrooms around the world. I also really enjoyed the various insights into how technology can enhance learning experiences. One of these demonstrations was in video form by Salkhan in Vancouver. I truly believe that AI will help the educational system in years to come when students are properly introduced to the software. However, while AI presents promising opportunities for personalized learning and efficient teaching support, it’s important to include the value of face-to-face interactions in education as well. As was said by other students of 522, I also believe that human connection really fosters deeper understanding and collaboration. These elements are integral to a learning environment. It is a very fine line, for me, when we are providing students with diverse tools to personalize their learning which can significantly improve engagement but can also be a tempting use of a personal assistant. By experience in my own classroom, I can see how students can get carried away with the support of AI but can then only become a detriment to their education. I guess my question for you is how can we really prevent our students from taking advantage of the use of AI and allowing it to become a tool to simply complete homework rather than to be an asset to support during a time of uncertainty? I have also seen this when parents want to support their child with a tutor, which then just becomes a homework tutor who completes assignments rather than teaches a skill, discipline or explains a particular topic. Hopefully, future classrooms can find a balance between AI and human interaction, ensuring an enriching educational experience for all. Great work!
Question: As learning becomes more personalized and individualized, how do you think educators will prevent a loss of collaboration and teamwork opportunities among students?
When I read this question, immediately I considered the flipped classroom, which has the individual work (reading and research) pushed to times outside the normal working hours. Basically, if there is homework, it is reading and preparing for the learning. During the classroom time, the classes focus on taking that learning and using it within interactions and collaboration. I think the consideration for this question is similar in that the classroom time should be the collaborative time to share reflections and interact with peers. The individual learning and the individualized AI is an important tool but it cannot be simply used to replace the classroom interactions. It is important for students to take the learning they have completed individually and share within the group.
Question: What ethical considerations should educators take into account when using predictive analytics for early intervention, and how can they ensure that data-driven interventions are supportive rather than stigmatizing for students?
Student streaming was the initial thing that I considered. While predictive analytics can be be a tool to increase the efficiency of training or effectively prepare for challenges in the learning. However, if you use this to limit students or to give some students advantages based on AI and data analysis, it can give unfair advantages and create biases within the education system. The first step for any institution using this technology is to be critical of the process and actively work to avoid using this predictive analytics as a way of providing certain services or changing the student’s education path.
To what level does the classroom of the future need to invest in security?
Security needs to be proactive and with every technological advance, there is a need for increased security. with increased technology also results in more complex threats that exists. As you collect more information on students as a part of these technological advances, the more risk there is to the individual about stolen data.
I am unable to post images in a comment, so the survey results are posted to the discussion page of the website. Take a look if you’re interested. Thank you so much for all your thoughts and predictions – it was really interesting!