Rogue teachers corrected our poster at the farmers market!
-
Rogue teachers corrected our poster at the farmers market!
(Okay so they told us about the mistake and we fixed it)
@aicaution Good luck on your petition!
I'm no grammar expert but I looked it up. My Oxford Dictionary of English says either word would be okay here.
"It is sometimes argued that, in relative clauses, that should be used for non-human references, while who should be used for human references: ‘a house that overlooks the park’ but ‘the woman who lives next door’. In practice, while it is true to say that who is restricted to human references, the function of that is flexible."
-
Rogue teachers corrected our poster at the farmers market!
(Okay so they told us about the mistake and we fixed it)
@aicaution In Spain we have similar movements
-
Rogue teachers corrected our poster at the farmers market!
(Okay so they told us about the mistake and we fixed it)
@aicaution why a pause end not just a stop?
-
Rogue teachers corrected our poster at the farmers market!
(Okay so they told us about the mistake and we fixed it)
RE: https://masto.ai/@GhostOnTheHalfShell/116750452774547724
A teacher did a more basic thing. Students loved it.
-
@aicaution why a pause end not just a stop?
@sashin The idea is to wait until there is more research on the effects of generative AI and chatbots on students.
Current research overwhelmingly shows that it harms students' education.
If there is scientific evidence of certain ways that some tech can be used to aid education, we should do those.
If there aren't, then the pause could be extended.
-
Rogue teachers corrected our poster at the farmers market!
(Okay so they told us about the mistake and we fixed it)
The QR code goes to this petition, asking for a two-year pause on AI in schools in BC.
If you have a minute, more signatures would help show the government how much people care about this issue.
https://actionnetwork.org/petitions/pause-on-generative-ai-in-bc-schools
-
@aicaution In Spain we have similar movements
@CorioPsicologia That's amazing, do you have any links to them? We're always looking to connect and learn
-
@aicaution Good luck on your petition!
I'm no grammar expert but I looked it up. My Oxford Dictionary of English says either word would be okay here.
"It is sometimes argued that, in relative clauses, that should be used for non-human references, while who should be used for human references: ‘a house that overlooks the park’ but ‘the woman who lives next door’. In practice, while it is true to say that who is restricted to human references, the function of that is flexible."
@ahimsa_pdx Thank you! It was one of our mostly-humans *who* made the mistake
-
Rogue teachers corrected our poster at the farmers market!
(Okay so they told us about the mistake and we fixed it)
@aicaution A blanket "pause" ignores that for many neurodivergent students, AI tools are essential cognitive prosthetics, not just shortcuts. Framing AI solely as a threat to "remembering" disregards its vital role in supporting executive function and accessibility. Rather than a regressive ban that disproportionately harms those who rely on them most, we should focus on implementing these tools responsibly to ensure equitable learning for all students.
-
@aicaution A blanket "pause" ignores that for many neurodivergent students, AI tools are essential cognitive prosthetics, not just shortcuts. Framing AI solely as a threat to "remembering" disregards its vital role in supporting executive function and accessibility. Rather than a regressive ban that disproportionately harms those who rely on them most, we should focus on implementing these tools responsibly to ensure equitable learning for all students.
@bedardbrandon928 Exceptions could be made for students with a legitimate need for some tech.
But for the vast majority of students, chatbots cause cognitive offloading.
-
@bedardbrandon928 Exceptions could be made for students with a legitimate need for some tech.
But for the vast majority of students, chatbots cause cognitive offloading.
@aicaution Categorizing accessibility as an 'exception' is the problem. This dismisses the reality that for neurodivergent students, this 'offloading' is essential scaffolding that enables engagement with complex material. A blanket ban creates a systemic barrier for every student who relies on these tools to participate. Also, who gets to decide who qualifies for these 'exceptions' and who doesn't? That subjective gatekeeping is exactly why a blanket ban is a failure of equity.
-
@bedardbrandon928 Exceptions could be made for students with a legitimate need for some tech.
But for the vast majority of students, chatbots cause cognitive offloading.
@aicaution The 'cognitive offloading' argument is the same panic used against calculators. We don't force long division; we use tools to bypass rote tasks to focus on higher-level systems. Why prioritize memorization over synthesis? This 'ban' isn't about student understanding; it's about institutions struggling to remain the sole gatekeepers of knowledge. We should be teaching mastery of these tools, not banning them to cling to an outdated academic power structure.
-
@bedardbrandon928 Exceptions could be made for students with a legitimate need for some tech.
But for the vast majority of students, chatbots cause cognitive offloading.
@aicaution The 'offloading' narrative also ignores students using AI to synthesize and simplify complex ideas—the Feynman Technique in practice. High-achieving students use these tools to master material by breaking it down, not to avoid learning it. Why penalize those using AI to deepen their understanding or improve their communication? This 'ban' assumes every student is looking for a shortcut, when in reality, many are using AI to push their intellectual boundaries further.
-
T tokeriis@helvede.net shared this topic
