This is a review of the paper produced by James Tobin, (2023), in advance of a discussion on technology in the House of Lords. Baroness Kidron was to ask the government ‘what assessment they have made of the role of educational technology (ed tech) being used in United Kingdom schools in relation to (1) the educational outcomes, (2) the social development, and (3) the privacy of schoolchildren’.
The paper describes ED Tech as the use of technology to support teaching or its day-to-day management which is also the way it is defined by UNESCO.
The paper identified that the use of technology had increased since COVID-19 and schools now used technology school for management and administration, teaching support and learning and pastoral support. They also used EdTech to support teaching of the curriculum but they also noted there was a variation in the extent to which different schools adopted EdTech with some schools using it widely and others ‘cautiously’.
The paper stated that the UK’s EdTech sector is the largest in Europe worth over £900 million a year and likely to grow with the introduction of new AI tools like ChatGPT which is now in wide circulation just a year after this paper was written.
The paper identifies AI as assistants: administrative assistants, parental assistants, teaching assistants and instructional assistants and government had allocated funding to enable teachers to use AI as assistants to help them with the development and planning of lessons ad quizzes to help reduce the use of their own time.
A new organisation called ‘AI in Education’ and led by Sir Anthony Seldon, head of Epsom College was formed to inform teachers of the benefits and dangers of AI in education.
They identified the following risks:
infantilisation of students (and staff)
moral risk, not least through deep fake
perceptions about cheating and dishonesty
lack of responsibility—or answers to the question: who is in charge?
impact on jobs
The paper suggests these identified risks are similar to the ones set out by John Baily in the education publication, Next which are:
· Student cheating,
· Bias in AI algorithms.
· Privacy concerns
· Decreased social connection
· Overreliance on technology
· Equity issues
Another risk identified by Baroness Kidron is the issue of equity of access to technology and the lack of consideration in the design of the tools to uphold the rights of children or further their development. She refers to a UNESCO report ‘The Ed Tech Tragedy’ which suggests AI tools were being developed without due consideration for the development needs of children and stated these firms were ‘cannibalising’ the sector.
The UNESCO report discussed the unwanted consequences of the use of technology during COIVD including isolation, mental health breakdown, lower achievement and invasive surveillance. They felt the hopes that technology would replace human teaching environments failed to manifest during COVID and questioned if the use of more technology will be a positive situation for learners.
The paper concluded with the issues around privacy and the need for guidelines, certification and accreditation around the use of AI in education.
It notes the risks of generative AI in schools and stated the government had a paper Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) in education.
This paper was interesting in that it provides an idea of the way the government views AI which is mainly with fear, distrust and trepidation.
Most of the threats stated here already exist with the presence of the internet, which is already a global staple, but like the internet, people generally tend to adapt the use of tools to suit them and generally tend to master or mitigate the risks as they become more familiar with them.
The document and its influences are by technocrats who generally would not use AI and therefore remain sceptical of its use. For UNESCO to label AI as the ‘ED Tech Tragedy’ is a big declaration which immediately puts fear into the minds of other policy makers and educators. Such a statement from a respected organisation does not encourage innovation or experimentation.
In terms of equity of access this is an indication of an unequal society and not a result of technology and therefore the cure is much deeper and needs to be sought outside of technology,
The paper focuses too much on the risk and dangers and less on the benefits and innovation which AI provides. Additionally, it focuses more on the administrative use of AI and less on its uses as a tool within the process of education itself.
In testament to the rapid development of AI, it can do far more than is suggested within the paper as tools continue to be developed.
The Government needs to be far more open and positive towards AI in education: the tools are here to stay and its focus must be on how to harness it for the good of learners and practitioners with an eye on the risks of course.
James Tobin, (2023), Educational technology: Digital innovation and AI in schools, House of Lords Library, https://lordslibrary.parliament.uk/educational-technology-digital-innovation-and-ai-in-schools/
Komentarze