Finding Joy

The den mother

Ours is a small team devoted to working on AI integration at an institution of higher education. We have worked together under different circumstances for over a decade. And so, we know each other. Our personal proclivities are the givens of our union. While I can’t characterize us as outwardly distinguishing our penchants, there seems to have been a grace of assimilation that has fortified our distinctions in achieving an authentic and trustworthy triad of perspectives.

I tend towards identifying myself as the den mother of artificial intelligence. Perhaps not so much Marion Ross as Jane Kaczmarek whose Lois character was more steely in her navigation of the world. My den mother role has the privilege of age to have witnessed the churn of technology, education, and policy over the decades. While I think our team shares in healthy critique of the promises waged by AI developers, mine will sometimes verge on the piercing due to my historicity.

Some of my favorite reading over the last few months has been focused on the history of educational technology. I have had the great joy of teaching the history of education as either a primary subject or as a framing for ethics, advocacy, or curriculum. While the technology specs are a new focus for me, the narratives of this branch of history support the theses of my ongoing curiosity within a career in the field.

There is a shiny nature to AI developers’ promises for education—Personal feedback! 24/7 tutors! Automated assessment! I often find myself asking the would-be providers to identify the problem they're solving. Sometimes the problem isn't apparent. But if the problem is surmised to be a lack of a personal relationship or touch in a student’s educational experience, then I think we need to ask why this gap is occurring. We need to interrogate if technology is the best solution.

My reading of the history of Western education suggests that there has never been a moment in which there was satisfaction with a system: the Sophists were criticized for teaching clever and misleading argumentation; Renaissance humanists disparaged the scholasticism of Anselm; Bruner questioned Skinner’s behaviorism.

This den mother exercises skepticism towards technological solutions for the perceived gaps in our educational system. It would seem that a gap related to personalization is a gap of persons—in that we need more qualified, dedicated, inspired, and driven persons to nurture and support learners.

I suspect that the gaps could be addressed through the better support and valor of educators.