Showing posts with label Education AI. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Education AI. Show all posts

Thursday, August 27, 2026

The Real Content of Digital Literacy and AI Literacy

What is AI literacy and digital literacy? Well, it shouldn't be just be teaching students "how to use."

It should be teaching students the technologies on a level that they can understand them much, much more deeply. 

We don't want "societal automatons" who just use as they're told.

We should want humans who can make the moral choices about what role AI specifically and technology generally plays in their lives and their future.

We should want humans who can decide for themselves whether the energy costs, water costs, and other resource costs are worth the continued personal and societal investment in AI and other technologies.

Too often Ed Tech and Digital literacy is about making "good-little users and consumers of technology."

Equipping our young with the whole picture behind these technologies, such as environmental costs, human costs, even personal costs, as well as a deep understanding beyond just churning out users for business and industry is imperative. 

Otherwise we are just dumping all the problems in their laps to solve. And I don't have the religious faith in technology that I once held. It is not our savior in waiting. We still have to come back to the human.

Saturday, August 2, 2025

Important Questions to Ponder in AI Adoption

"The question of who demonized work is an important one, for as anyone knows, it can give great joy and be immensely satisfying when it is something one genuinely likes doing. Not much mechanized labor today falls into that category, whether it is sitting in front of a computer or tending a machine in a factory."  Nichols Fox, Against the Machine


Much of the AI marketing propaganda actually seeks to demonize work whether it intends to or not in order to sell its products. All the talk about "automation" of tasks is about turning over to a machine work that currently a person is doing. "AI will take away all the tasks you do not enjoy doing," is the promo-rhetoric. That is certainly appetizing, for who certainly does not wish to get rid of those annoying, monotonous tasks that are a part of our everyday lives?

But historically, machinery like AI has done much more than rid humans of those less desirous tasks; it has also replaced genuine, enjoyable, fulfilling work for some. Think about the craftsmen who made things for us before machines took over. Now, don't get me wrong, I am not advocating totally against machines and manufacturing, for unquestionably, a lot of good has come from those things, and I am a person who has benefited from them. I will also add that even craftsmen adopted machines and tools that either replaced undesirable tasks or made their work more timely. But what I am speaking of is just for a bit of sober-minded, critical thinking in the midst of all this AI Hype. I am suggesting that while AI can certainly assist in our work, the central question for me is: "Just what am I willing to outsource to mechanical systems?" "What tasks am I unwilling to give up because it is necessary for me to carry out my work?"

The sales pitch I hear from AI salespersons and AI evangelists is often that "It will make you more efficient. It will save you time" but is the tasks I am engaged in meant to be efficient? That is an important question because not everything we do fits the mechanical, business definition of efficiency. Take writing this: it is far from efficient to compose this writing. It certainly does not often lend itself to a time-schedule. And, I will add that the criteria of efficiency has no place for task-fulfillment personally unless of course one of your obsessions is be efficient in all things. Which reminds me of a poem I used to teach in high school English called, "Mr. Artesian's Conscientiousness" by Ogden Nash.

In this poem, an office worker, Mr. Artesian is so obsessed with time that his sole objective becomes "saving oodles of time" which is a hallmark of the efficiency obsession. He then takes on a program to reduce the time he spends engaged in daily activities like sleeping, eating, shaving, etc., until the end result he does not like the time he has to waste traveling in an elevator, so he jumps out his fiftieth floor window to save time. No doubt there are truly ridiculous things sometimes undertaken for the sake of efficiency, so certainly outsourcing a task to AI could be one of those. This means thinking critically for yourself about just what can be outsourced to this new-fangled technology. In addition, there just might be some personally fulfilling reasons to not outsource.

Ultimately, I am being cynical here, this uncritical hype about outsourcing our work and lives to technology just might be another way for Silicon Valley tech companies to get even more of our personal data for economic exploitation. 


The AI companies and evangelists certainly have an interest as well in getting us to think we hate our work, after all, if they can get us to see our work or parts of it as undesirable, they stand a better chance to make bundles. They want us, you and me, to be AI users, consumers.


In the end, it is OK to be sober, slow-moving, and not in a hurry in your decisions about whether or not you will use AI to outsource your work. It is an old marketing tactic to get your customer to think you have to buy their product now.

Tuesday, July 1, 2025

Should We Join the Race to Adopt New Technologies Such as AI?

Photo by Author: NC Mountain Laurel

Spent some time reading the book Power and Progress by Nobel Prize-winning economists Daron Acemoglu and Simon Johnson. In that book they basically point out that all the "promises of progress and prosperity" by technology entrepreneurs and Silicon Valley are not automatic. 

History shows that an automatic increase in prosperity by all after the introduction and adoption of a new technology does not always happen. Case in point: "the cotton gin." Perhaps it made a lot of Southern planters rich, but it seriously caused a degrading in the lives of those in slavery. 

Those constantly peddling new technological "machines" and solutions try to foreclose any questions about whether those are really beneficial to all by emphasizing what I call the "Silicon Valley Promise." At a basic level, this promise says we will all benefit from the latest innovation to come from these tech-entrepreneurs.

There are many books written in the service of indoctrinating people with the "Silicon Valley Promise." One such book by Erik Byrnjolfsson in 2013 entitled " The Second Machine Age" is typical of this genre generated by tech-cheerleaders of Silicon Valley. In this book, he  aptly captures a singular doctrine of the Silicon Valley Technology Cult when he writes: 

"What can we do to create shared prosperity? The answer is not to slow down technology. Instead of racing against the machine, we need to race with the machine. That is our grand challenge." 

In other words, whatever is invented by Silicon Valley and the Technology Cult, it will bring about prosperity and progress, so we might as well accept it, adopt it, and race along with it. Don't take time to even question whether it is needed or desired or really even beneficial. Let's just adopt it and make millions.

The problem is, what if that technology is racing toward a cliff? Not to be apocalyptic, but it doesn't have to be a world-ending cliff to be detrimental. It might simply be a cliff of unforeseen, negative consequences because we have been too busy "racing with the technology." 

Don't get me wrong, I am not a believer in the cult of a futuristic Artificial General Intelligence" that is somehow going to be our savior and lead us out of this mess technology created in the first place. I do not believe machines will ever be able to totally think and be like humans. But nonetheless, we have participated in this race to nowhere many times before.

This racing that Brynjolfsson speaks of is the best foundational marketing that any product could possibly have.  Short-circuit any all moral and social questions and criticism in the beginning. No matter what is invented is going to bring prosperity to all. Upon introduction of a new technology, the inventor is prosperous of course, but the marketers can jump aboard and make their money too. Then the consultants join in and become prosperous. The salespeople join in and become prosperous. There are those who even invent new careers based on this technology who become prosperous. 

Everyone who races along with the technology instead of fighting it become prosperous. Never mind those who are pre-empted from joining the race to begin with and who do not have the means to do so. But, there is no harm here, correct?