alt Hacker NewsAI is held to a much higher standard than the existing education techniques.
Even without AI teachers are implementing new techniques without any evidence of their effectiveness. In some cases, there is mountains of evidence that their techniques are not effective. From the prohibition on phonics in reading, learning styles, building thinking classrooms, or just the entire idea of constructivism. These are all worse than the techniques that they replace. AI systems at the very least are measured and have some kind of tracking of what works.
I'm not advocating for AI necessarily, but education is in the pre-scientific phase and it needs to start by implementing evidence based techniques, AI or no.
Replies
What is the mountain of evidence against "the entire idea of constructivism"?
I am both pro and against this at the same time. I love the idea of tracking it as an aggregate, but I hate the idea that the kid may end up being stuck on some vibe coded idiocy and unable to move on, because of it ( I still shudder at some of the ridiculous math tests in college that could not account for the right answer, but not in the exactly right format that was not disclosed as expected ).
I am not even suggesting in person teaching is the only solution either. I am currently dealing with, apparently, my kids teacher, who, well, kinda checked out, but as much I am happy for her being able to retire soon, I am not sure why my kid has to suffer academically.
What I am saying is, there is room for AI. What I worry about is, people are idiots and anything half-useful will be neutered and kids will have all the drawbacks of heavy surveillance and zero to show for it.