In UK the people who send their kids to feel paying schools,often at the cost of struggle and going without,do so because they know that Education is about a lot more than cramming ones brain with innumerable facts. In vain will their local State Comprehensive flourish charts showing the high number of A* pupils it produced every year,all candidates for university,at least. I find it a bit sad that all our politicians see "social mobility" as having a well paid job thanks to those A*'s. I think its such a narrow definition. I enjoy classical music,go to the theatre,travel if I've ever got any money,and cook meals where all the ingredients are mixed up together not on the plate in separate dollops(think dire 1950s British home cooking) I regard this as SOCIAL MOBILITY since I was brought up in a family that self-barred from all this with the mantra "People Like Us Don't Do Things Like That". How,I hated being People Like Us,I wanted to be People Like Them.
The writer LYNSEY HANLEY from a similar background writes excellently about this.
Thanks Jane. Lots to unpack here, but totally agree that there is lots of room for innovation change in the way that we "do" education. Hopeful that we can use these conversations around AI as an opportunity to move in positive directions.
Thanks as well for the recommendation to Lynsey Hanley. Do you have a specific link or resources that you would recommend I start with?
Best look on Amazon. Putting links is one of my many tech weaknesses. But for accident or fate I wouldn't even be online. Ms Hanleys books are excellent and I can identify with so much of what she described,the invisible self constructed walls.
Fabulous piece - education isn’t about ‘downloading information’, it’s about exploration. I don’t see AI replacing teachers in helping people explore the world because it doesn’t create anything new. But I’m looking forward to seeing how it can support us.
Thanks Jack! I feel there are going to be many interesting opportunities in the years to come, but we need to be careful to understand what exactly AI is since it can easily deceive us into thinking it is something that it is not. I'm also curious to think more about how it can help us to explore and grow.
Love the distinction between “personal” and “personalized” - crystalizes so simply the importance (and impact) of genuine human interaction. Great article.
Thanks Elizabeth! One of the resources that helped me think through the difference between personal and personalized was Andy Crouch's latest book, The Life We Are Looking For. Not education specific, but lots of connections. Would commend it to you: https://andy-crouch.com/
“The world's most advanced personalized generative AI chatbot is fundamentally unable to replace the personal connection offered in the relationship between the teacher and student.”
This reminds me of a major theme of Kazuo Ishiguro’s Klara and the Sun. I won’t spoil it for you if you haven’t read it, but it will inform my next question. It’s a really good book. Prescient.
If our development of AI is in its infancy, would it satisfy you if, in its maturity, an AI companion would be indistinguishable from a real human? What are you saying is fundamental that a real human brings to the task of teaching that a sufficiently advanced machine does not?
Hey Josh, thanks for the comment. Glad to finally be able to find some time to reply!
I haven't read Klara and the Sun yet but have heard of it before. Read a few blurbs and it looks very interesting. Glad that the semester is coming to a close and I'll hopefully have some more time to read!
Your question is a good one. It feels very similar to me to the framing of the Turing Test and a deep question of epistemology: what does it actually mean to be human and how do we understand what that means given our limited understanding?
There is obviously no way that I'm going to be able to sufficiently address this in a quick comment, but my 2-sentence take is that my answer to this question is significantly shaped by deep philosophical and religious questions about what it means to be human and the nature of reality. As a Christian, I see a fundamental distinction between humans and other parts of nature, whether those are human-made machines or other animals. So for me, I don't see a way that AI companions could ever be in essence the same as humans (even if they were in some ways indistinguishable) given that humans are made in the image of God and these machines would be made in our image (interesting threads to pull on about how AI might serve as modern idols).
Thanks again for the thought-provoking question and would be curious to hear your thoughts!
I agree with you. I think the challenge is that if we list of any number of characteristics - even ineffable ones about companionship - it may eventually be the case that a robot could replicate or replace a human in bearing them. We run into similar trouble trying to declare that the imago Dei is grounded on certain characteristics, as we disqualify some people who don’t bear those traits. I think a sound Christian response is that people are special because God chose us to represent him in the world in a special way. Although I still struggle with the technical ramifications of advancing technology.
Totally agree with you that we need to be careful about saying things like "this is the list." Part of being ineffable is that this quest to fully describe or define the thing is by definition impossible. Lots of great discussions to be had here!
You have once again hit it out of the ballpark with this article, Professor Josh. Good work. You bring to mind some of my past teaching experiences, which include teaching driving, tutoring math and writing, and coaching sports (ice speedskating). One critical element which goes far beyond LLM training is human intuition as employed by those who instruct. This involves tons of tactile and non-verbal communication which are necessarily part of our human-to-human transactions, and could it be these factors which contribute to 2-sigma improvement in student learning? The closet Luddite in me wants to laugh off whatever progress has been claimed by educational AI developers, and I can only proffer, "Train that* into your GPT!," that* meaning human intuition and the ability to pick up, read, and effectively interpret non-verbal communication with all its nuances. Right! In short, God created the human mind, the most powerful computing device ever invented. We will never outdo the Creator (but I do find it entertaining watching others try).
Thanks for your kind words, Jim. I love how you put it: "human intuition as employed by those who instruct." This is a thread I want to continue to pull on in future posts. Thanks for the inspiration and ideas.
Agree with you that the human mind, body, and soul is magnificent. In many ways, AI serves to remind us frequently of that fact.
Great read, Josh! I'm adding your article to my next edition of AI Apprentice, a weekly future of learning and work newsletter (aiapprentice.info). There, I said: "I agree with many of Josh’s core points about AI bots never replacing teachers (and don’t ever want to see that happen), but disagree that AI tutors won’t solve blooms 2sigma / massively advance student learning. I’d bet the house on it. A good, long read, though." Maybe we can compare notes some day? :)
On the bigger question of advancing student learning, the question is pretty gnarly in terms of what we mean by student learning. I wouldn't be surprised to see AI tutors assisting in some areas of learning or at least performance, but it's unclear to me that the improvement in those areas wouldn't come with some off-target undesirable impacts in other areas.
Regardless, it seems more important than ever to clearly articulate the purpose of education. One's view on the potential of AI tutors is significantly influenced by the answer to that question.
However, it's worth noting the variability in the effectiveness of human teachers, some of whom do struggle with - poor attitude (lack of empathy, sarcasm etc) , communication, biases, or even burnout.
AI, while certainly not a replacement, could serve as a powerful tool to support teachers, offering consistency and personalised learning at scale.
By leveraging AI to handle routine tasks, find creative explanations and analyse educational data, we can enhance teachers' capabilities and even alleviate some of their burdens.
This could lead to a more balanced educational system where technology complements human efforts, ensuring all students receive a high-quality education adaptively tailored to their needs.
You make a good point that we should consider the unevenness of the teaching and learning landscape. I share your hope that AI can help to support students and improve learning for students, but think we need to be clear-eyed about the many potential incentive structures that might bend these potentially positive applications in unhelpful directions.
Nice article thank you. I wonder if the same points you make are also applicable to on-line learning? How critical is it to a student to have a real teacher in the classroom? What about the quality of the teacher?
Yes, I think there are definitely areas where these ideas apply to on-line learning. One lens I like to think about it through is about the depth of relationship that certain mediums can support. This post I wrote a while back has helped me to think about that through the lens of what Moni Guzman conceptualizes as the conversation dial. https://joshbrake.substack.com/p/how-curious-conversation-can-build
Lots of connections to good education! Quality of the teacher is really important too, but I that quality goes way beyond simply training and knowledge, extending to the human dimensions of empathy and care for students and their wellbeing.
You are clearly thinking deeply about this issue. It’s rare to come across a technical mind who can write with the grace of humanities.
While it’s not your main point, I want to clarify your view of friction in learning. Are you claiming and framing LLMs as an information access tool, as opposed to a learning tool? And thus the lack of friction makes them not effective?
This is great! I am a former public school teacher, and I now tutor homeschooled students 1:1. I love Reading and Language Arts, so that is my focus and has become an expertise. I call what I do “authentically personalized” tutoring.
People have been raving about or scared of AI in recent years, but teachers who practice artfully can never be replaced.
In UK the people who send their kids to feel paying schools,often at the cost of struggle and going without,do so because they know that Education is about a lot more than cramming ones brain with innumerable facts. In vain will their local State Comprehensive flourish charts showing the high number of A* pupils it produced every year,all candidates for university,at least. I find it a bit sad that all our politicians see "social mobility" as having a well paid job thanks to those A*'s. I think its such a narrow definition. I enjoy classical music,go to the theatre,travel if I've ever got any money,and cook meals where all the ingredients are mixed up together not on the plate in separate dollops(think dire 1950s British home cooking) I regard this as SOCIAL MOBILITY since I was brought up in a family that self-barred from all this with the mantra "People Like Us Don't Do Things Like That". How,I hated being People Like Us,I wanted to be People Like Them.
The writer LYNSEY HANLEY from a similar background writes excellently about this.
Thanks Jane. Lots to unpack here, but totally agree that there is lots of room for innovation change in the way that we "do" education. Hopeful that we can use these conversations around AI as an opportunity to move in positive directions.
Thanks as well for the recommendation to Lynsey Hanley. Do you have a specific link or resources that you would recommend I start with?
Best look on Amazon. Putting links is one of my many tech weaknesses. But for accident or fate I wouldn't even be online. Ms Hanleys books are excellent and I can identify with so much of what she described,the invisible self constructed walls.
Those squirrels! Such a great photo. I do absolutely get a kick out of this. (Also hope the eggs stayed safe.) Thanks for sharing!
Fabulous piece - education isn’t about ‘downloading information’, it’s about exploration. I don’t see AI replacing teachers in helping people explore the world because it doesn’t create anything new. But I’m looking forward to seeing how it can support us.
Thanks Jack! I feel there are going to be many interesting opportunities in the years to come, but we need to be careful to understand what exactly AI is since it can easily deceive us into thinking it is something that it is not. I'm also curious to think more about how it can help us to explore and grow.
Love the distinction between “personal” and “personalized” - crystalizes so simply the importance (and impact) of genuine human interaction. Great article.
Thanks Elizabeth! One of the resources that helped me think through the difference between personal and personalized was Andy Crouch's latest book, The Life We Are Looking For. Not education specific, but lots of connections. Would commend it to you: https://andy-crouch.com/
“The world's most advanced personalized generative AI chatbot is fundamentally unable to replace the personal connection offered in the relationship between the teacher and student.”
This reminds me of a major theme of Kazuo Ishiguro’s Klara and the Sun. I won’t spoil it for you if you haven’t read it, but it will inform my next question. It’s a really good book. Prescient.
If our development of AI is in its infancy, would it satisfy you if, in its maturity, an AI companion would be indistinguishable from a real human? What are you saying is fundamental that a real human brings to the task of teaching that a sufficiently advanced machine does not?
Hey Josh, thanks for the comment. Glad to finally be able to find some time to reply!
I haven't read Klara and the Sun yet but have heard of it before. Read a few blurbs and it looks very interesting. Glad that the semester is coming to a close and I'll hopefully have some more time to read!
Your question is a good one. It feels very similar to me to the framing of the Turing Test and a deep question of epistemology: what does it actually mean to be human and how do we understand what that means given our limited understanding?
There is obviously no way that I'm going to be able to sufficiently address this in a quick comment, but my 2-sentence take is that my answer to this question is significantly shaped by deep philosophical and religious questions about what it means to be human and the nature of reality. As a Christian, I see a fundamental distinction between humans and other parts of nature, whether those are human-made machines or other animals. So for me, I don't see a way that AI companions could ever be in essence the same as humans (even if they were in some ways indistinguishable) given that humans are made in the image of God and these machines would be made in our image (interesting threads to pull on about how AI might serve as modern idols).
Thanks again for the thought-provoking question and would be curious to hear your thoughts!
I agree with you. I think the challenge is that if we list of any number of characteristics - even ineffable ones about companionship - it may eventually be the case that a robot could replicate or replace a human in bearing them. We run into similar trouble trying to declare that the imago Dei is grounded on certain characteristics, as we disqualify some people who don’t bear those traits. I think a sound Christian response is that people are special because God chose us to represent him in the world in a special way. Although I still struggle with the technical ramifications of advancing technology.
Totally agree with you that we need to be careful about saying things like "this is the list." Part of being ineffable is that this quest to fully describe or define the thing is by definition impossible. Lots of great discussions to be had here!
It's no surprise i can't connect with an ai - it's nothing like me - it doesn't have a body
You have once again hit it out of the ballpark with this article, Professor Josh. Good work. You bring to mind some of my past teaching experiences, which include teaching driving, tutoring math and writing, and coaching sports (ice speedskating). One critical element which goes far beyond LLM training is human intuition as employed by those who instruct. This involves tons of tactile and non-verbal communication which are necessarily part of our human-to-human transactions, and could it be these factors which contribute to 2-sigma improvement in student learning? The closet Luddite in me wants to laugh off whatever progress has been claimed by educational AI developers, and I can only proffer, "Train that* into your GPT!," that* meaning human intuition and the ability to pick up, read, and effectively interpret non-verbal communication with all its nuances. Right! In short, God created the human mind, the most powerful computing device ever invented. We will never outdo the Creator (but I do find it entertaining watching others try).
Thanks for your kind words, Jim. I love how you put it: "human intuition as employed by those who instruct." This is a thread I want to continue to pull on in future posts. Thanks for the inspiration and ideas.
Agree with you that the human mind, body, and soul is magnificent. In many ways, AI serves to remind us frequently of that fact.
Great read, Josh! I'm adding your article to my next edition of AI Apprentice, a weekly future of learning and work newsletter (aiapprentice.info). There, I said: "I agree with many of Josh’s core points about AI bots never replacing teachers (and don’t ever want to see that happen), but disagree that AI tutors won’t solve blooms 2sigma / massively advance student learning. I’d bet the house on it. A good, long read, though." Maybe we can compare notes some day? :)
Thanks for the comment, Lindsey. I think there a few things to pull apart here in more detail.
The first is whether the results from Bloom's two sigma paper actually replicate. There's at least some evidence to suggest that the effect he saw is far greater than the actual impact of the interventions he measured. https://www.educationnext.org/two-sigma-tutoring-separating-science-fiction-from-science-fact/
On the bigger question of advancing student learning, the question is pretty gnarly in terms of what we mean by student learning. I wouldn't be surprised to see AI tutors assisting in some areas of learning or at least performance, but it's unclear to me that the improvement in those areas wouldn't come with some off-target undesirable impacts in other areas.
Regardless, it seems more important than ever to clearly articulate the purpose of education. One's view on the potential of AI tutors is significantly influenced by the answer to that question.
Great insights!
However, it's worth noting the variability in the effectiveness of human teachers, some of whom do struggle with - poor attitude (lack of empathy, sarcasm etc) , communication, biases, or even burnout.
AI, while certainly not a replacement, could serve as a powerful tool to support teachers, offering consistency and personalised learning at scale.
By leveraging AI to handle routine tasks, find creative explanations and analyse educational data, we can enhance teachers' capabilities and even alleviate some of their burdens.
This could lead to a more balanced educational system where technology complements human efforts, ensuring all students receive a high-quality education adaptively tailored to their needs.
You make a good point that we should consider the unevenness of the teaching and learning landscape. I share your hope that AI can help to support students and improve learning for students, but think we need to be clear-eyed about the many potential incentive structures that might bend these potentially positive applications in unhelpful directions.
Nice article thank you. I wonder if the same points you make are also applicable to on-line learning? How critical is it to a student to have a real teacher in the classroom? What about the quality of the teacher?
Thanks for the comment and questions, David.
Yes, I think there are definitely areas where these ideas apply to on-line learning. One lens I like to think about it through is about the depth of relationship that certain mediums can support. This post I wrote a while back has helped me to think about that through the lens of what Moni Guzman conceptualizes as the conversation dial. https://joshbrake.substack.com/p/how-curious-conversation-can-build
Lots of connections to good education! Quality of the teacher is really important too, but I that quality goes way beyond simply training and knowledge, extending to the human dimensions of empathy and care for students and their wellbeing.
I think when it’s 1 on 1 we feel the human walking with us and we want to learn and perform. it gives us the confidence to get it wrong.
You are clearly thinking deeply about this issue. It’s rare to come across a technical mind who can write with the grace of humanities.
While it’s not your main point, I want to clarify your view of friction in learning. Are you claiming and framing LLMs as an information access tool, as opposed to a learning tool? And thus the lack of friction makes them not effective?
Agree with everything you said. But let's face it, there's going to be AI for the wealthy, and a different AI for the rest of us.
Recently, I asked a chatbot to explain some classical guitar fingerings to me, and I got banned for prompting sexual content.
I'm thinking "what the hell?"
Yes, the AI recognized I was asking for "fingering" and based on that denied me service based on Terms of Use violations.
The versions of AI the average people have access to are crap.
This is great! I am a former public school teacher, and I now tutor homeschooled students 1:1. I love Reading and Language Arts, so that is my focus and has become an expertise. I call what I do “authentically personalized” tutoring.
People have been raving about or scared of AI in recent years, but teachers who practice artfully can never be replaced.
Thanks Beth. Love your mention of the art of teaching. This is an idea I'm hoping to explore in a post in the next few weeks.