Mike Paul

The Battle of Access: Mississippi’s New Law and the Fight for Information Freedom

In a world where information is increasingly digital and accessible, a new law in Mississippi is causing a stir. The law, Mississippi Code 39-3-25, part of House Bill 1315, has effectively banned anyone under the age of 18 from accessing digital materials made available through public and school libraries without explicit parental or guardian permission. This move has sparked a debate about the morality of censorship and the right to access information.

The law, which went into effect on July 1, 2023, has left libraries across the state scrambling to comply. It mandates that vendors providing digital resources must verify that all their materials comply with the state’s definition of “obscenity.” This definition is broad and includes any material that contains representations or descriptions of various sexual acts, cruelty, violence, or anything deemed “likely to be injurious or harmful to a child.”

The implications of this law are far-reaching. Any vendor with materials in their system depicting sexual reproduction, queerness, or even images of nude female breasts – often part of sexual education, reproductive education, and biology and anatomy books for those under 18 – would be out of compliance with the law. As a result, platforms like Hoopla and Overdrive, which are not set up to change access based on age or varying laws by the municipality, may have to shut down access altogether.

This law has been seen by many as a step towards limiting public goods like libraries and creating systems where young people in some states have access to a world of knowledge and resources, while others are shut out entirely. It disproportionately affects those with the least privileges – those in unstable homes, those without regular internet access, and those without active parents or guardians in their lives.

The First Regional Public Library has already posted an announcement on its homepage regarding the changes, and the Vicksburg Public Library is still figuring out how the law will impact its patrons’ access to digital materials. For now, they’ve developed a new system of library card distribution, requiring those under 18 to have parental or guardian consent to access materials.

Mississippi is not the first state to limit access to materials and place the onus of compliance on the vendors. Texas is undergoing similar changes, and it’s likely that this will lead to similar, if not more dire, lockouts of material access for students statewide.

This move by Mississippi and other states highlights the ongoing battle over access to information and the role of libraries in our society. As we continue to navigate the digital age, the question remains: who gets to decide what information is accessible and to whom?

Read the original article

The Eclectic Educator is a free resource for everyone passionate about education and creativity. If you enjoy the content and want to support the newsletter, consider becoming a paid subscriber. Your support helps keep the insights and inspiration coming!

Rethinking AI in Education: The Unintended Consequences of AI Detection Tools

crop faceless diverse male colleagues working on netbooks in office — Photo by William Fortunato on Pexels.com

In the rapidly evolving world of artificial intelligence (AI), we are constantly faced with new challenges and ethical dilemmas. One such issue has recently been brought to light by a study published in The Guardian. The study reveals a concerning bias in AI detection tools, particularly against non-native English speakers.

These AI detection tools are designed to identify whether a piece of text has been written by a human or generated by an AI. They are increasingly being used in academic and professional settings to prevent what some consider a new form of cheating – using AI to write essays or job applications. However, the study found that these tools often incorrectly flag work produced by non-native English speakers as AI-generated.

The researchers tested seven popular AI text detectors using 91 English essays written by non-native speakers. Over half of these essays, written for the Test of English as a Foreign Language (TOEFL), were incorrectly identified as AI-generated. In stark contrast, when essays written by native English-speaking eighth graders in the US were tested, over 90% were correctly identified as human-generated.

The bias seems to stem from how these detectors assess what is human and what is AI-generated. They use a measure called “text perplexity”, which gauges how “surprised” or “confused” a generative language model is when trying to predict the next word in a sentence. Large language models like ChatGPT are trained to produce low perplexity text, which means that if humans use a lot of common words in a familiar pattern in their writing, their work is at risk of being mistaken for AI-generated text. This risk is greater with non-native English speakers, who are more likely to adopt simpler word choices.

The implications of these findings are serious. AI detectors could falsely flag college and job applications as AI-generated, and marginalize non-native English speakers on the internet, as search engines such as Google downgrade what is assessed to be AI-generated content. In education, non-native students bear more risks of false accusations of cheating, which can be detrimental to a student’s academic career and psychological well-being.

In light of these findings, Jahna Otterbacher at the Cyprus Center for Algorithmic Transparency at the Open University of Cyprus suggests a different approach. Instead of fighting AI with more AI, we should develop an academic culture that promotes the use of generative AI in a creative, ethical manner. She warns that AI models like ChatGPT, which are constantly learning from public data, will eventually learn to outsmart any detector.

This study serves as a reminder that as we continue to integrate AI into our lives, we must remain vigilant about its potential unintended consequences. It’s crucial that we continue to question and scrutinize the tools we use, especially when they have the potential to discriminate or cause harm. As we move forward, let’s ensure that our use of AI in education and other sectors is not only innovative but also fair and ethical.

For more details, you can read the full article here.

5 Questions Students Should Ask About AI-Generated Content

monitor screen showing chatgpt landing page — Photo by Andrew Neel on Pexels.com

Do your students enjoy interacting with AI chatbots? Are they fascinated by the idea of AI-generated content, such as articles, poems, or even code? Do you want to help your students learn how to discern the difference between human and AI-generated content? If you answered yes to any of these questions, consider integrating AI literacy education into your lessons.

AI literacy expands traditional literacy to include new forms of reading, writing, and communicating. It involves understanding how AI systems work, how they generate content, and how to critically evaluate the information they produce. AI literacy empowers people to be critical thinkers and makers, effective communicators, and active citizens in an increasingly digital world.

Think of it this way: Students learn print literacy — how to read and write. But they should also learn AI literacy — how to “read and write” AI-generated messages in different forms, whether it’s a text, an article, a poem, or anything else. The most powerful way for students to put these skills into practice is through both critiquing the AI-generated content they consume and analyzing the AI-generated content they create.

So, how should students learn to critique and analyze AI-generated content? Most leaders in the AI literacy community use some version of the five key questions:

Who created this AI model? Help your students understand that all AI models have creators and underlying objectives. The AI models we interact with were constructed by someone with a particular vision, background, and agenda. Help students understand how they should question both the messages they see, as well the platforms on which messages are shared.
What data was used to train this AI model? Different AI models are trained on different datasets, which can greatly influence their output. Help students recognize how this often comes in the form of new and innovative techniques to capture our attention – sometimes without us even realizing it.
How might different people interpret this AI-generated content? This question helps students consider how all of us bring our own individual backgrounds, values, and beliefs to how we interpret AI-generated messages. For any piece of AI-generated content, there are often as many interpretations as there are viewers.
Which lifestyles, values, and points of view are represented — or missing? Just as we all bring our own backgrounds and values to how we interpret what we see, AI-generated messages themselves are embedded with values and points of view. Help students question and consider how certain perspectives or voices might be missing from a particular AI-generated message.
Why is this AI-generated content being produced? With this question, have students explore the purpose of the AI-generated content. Is it to inform, entertain, or persuade, or could it be some combination of these? Also, have students explore possible motives behind why certain AI-generated content has been produced.

As teachers, we can think about how to weave these five questions into our instruction, helping our students to think critically about AI-generated content. A few scenarios could include lessons where students interact with AI chatbots or any time we ask students to create AI-generated projects. Eventually, as we model this type of critical thinking for students, asking these questions themselves will become second nature to them.

Beyond Homework: The Evolution of the Flipped Classroom

flexible man doing flip on street — Photo by Mary Taylor on Pexels.com

As the landscape of education continues to evolve in response to global disruptions and digital advancements, blended learning models have surged in popularity. Among these is the flipped classroom model, a strategy that leverages video instruction to mitigate potential obstacles that make it challenging for students to access information presented live. However, I often hear the question, “Can I use the flipped classroom if I don’t assign homework?”
Catlin Tucker

Catlin Tucker explores the evolution of the flipped classroom model and discusses its potential beyond traditional homework assignments. The author reflects on how the concept has transformed over the years and provides valuable insights into its current state.

Tucker emphasizes that the flipped classroom is no longer limited to a mere reversal of in-class and at-home activities. Instead, it has evolved into a more dynamic and interactive learning experience. The traditional model involved students watching video lectures at home and completing practice exercises in the classroom. However, Tucker suggests that educators can now take advantage of various digital tools and instructional strategies to enhance the flipped classroom approach.

Sale

The Shift to Student-Led: Reimagining Classroom Workflows with UDL and Blended Learning

Tucker, Catlin R. (Author)
English (Publication Language)
270 Pages – 11/09/2022 (Publication Date) – Impress (Publisher)

One key takeaway from the post is the importance of leveraging technology to make flipped learning more engaging and personalized. Tucker suggests incorporating interactive videos, online discussions, and collaborative projects to foster deeper student engagement. By diversifying the resources and activities, educators can create a more inclusive and interactive learning environment.

Another significant point highlighted by Tucker is the need for intentional planning and scaffolding in a flipped classroom. Educators should design clear guidelines and structures to support students in their independent learning endeavors. This involves providing explicit instructions, organizing content in manageable chunks, and offering continuous guidance throughout the process.

Tucker also explores the concept of differentiation within the flipped classroom. She suggests tailoring instructional materials and activities to meet the diverse needs of students. By providing a range of resources, teachers can support students with different learning styles and abilities, promoting an inclusive and equitable learning environment.

UDL and Blended Learning: Thriving in Flexible Learning Landscapes

Amazon Kindle Edition
Novak, Katie (Author)
English (Publication Language)
234 Pages – 05/28/2021 (Publication Date) – Impress (Publisher)

In conclusion, Catlin Tucker’s blog post emphasizes the evolution of the flipped classroom beyond its original concept of homework flipping. By embracing technology, intentional planning, and differentiation, educators can create a more engaging and student-centered learning experience. The flipped classroom has the potential to transform traditional teaching practices and foster deeper understanding and collaboration among students.

Link to the original blog post: Beyond Homework: Flipped Classroom

Flying the Kite High Against Digital Colonialism: FOSS in the Era of EdTech

internet technology computer display — Photo by Markus Spiske on Pexels.com

In 2001, the Kerala government launched an EdTech project, IT@School, that was successfully pressured to resist digital colonialism. Recognizing how Microsoft, the tech super-giant of the day, threatened to undermine digital self-determination, activists and teacher’s unions pushed the Kerala government to make Free and Open Source Software (FOSS) mandatory in public schools. While IT@School and its successor, KITE, are scarcely known outside of India, their success over the past two decades presents an important model for resistance to Big Tech.
Michael Kwet

In this thought-provoking article by Michael Kwet, the author highlights the importance of avoiding digital colonialism and emphasizes the role of free and open-source software (FOSS) in promoting global digital justice. The article specifically focuses on the context of educational technology (EdTech) and its potential implications for marginalized communities.

Kwet defines “digital colonialism” as a phenomenon where powerful technology companies from developed countries dominate and control the digital infrastructure and services of less-developed nations. This leads to a dependence on foreign corporations, resulting in a loss of control over data, infrastructure, and decision-making processes. Kwet argues that this creates a new form of colonization where power and influence are exerted through digital means.

One solution proposed by Kwet is the promotion and adoption of free and open-source software (FOSS). FOSS refers to software that is freely available for anyone to use, modify, and distribute. It operates under a transparent and collaborative model, allowing communities to take ownership and control over their digital tools. Kwet believes that by embracing FOSS, countries can regain autonomy over their technological systems, reducing their reliance on foreign entities and fostering local innovation.

The article also highlights the global digital justice movement, which seeks to address the power imbalances and inequalities created by digital colonialism. This movement advocates for the rights of marginalized communities to access and control their own digital infrastructure, ensuring that technology is used to empower rather than exploit. The global digital justice movement emphasizes the need for fair and inclusive digital policies that prioritize the interests and well-being of all individuals, particularly those who have historically been marginalized or excluded.

Kwet warns against the pitfalls of relying solely on proprietary software and foreign corporations for EdTech solutions. He argues that this approach perpetuates the dominance of global technology giants, perpetuating digital colonialism and hindering local development. Instead, he encourages governments, educators, and technologists to explore and implement FOSS alternatives that empower communities, promote knowledge-sharing, and foster digital sovereignty.

In conclusion, the article emphasizes the importance of avoiding digital colonialism in the realm of EdTech. It encourages the adoption of FOSS as a means to promote global digital justice, empower marginalized communities, and regain control over digital infrastructure. By embracing these principles, societies can strive toward a more equitable and inclusive digital future.

“The Precipice” – A Call to Action for Modern Education: Embracing Existential Risk and Our Students’ Future

"We need to take decisive steps to end this period of escalating risk and safeguard our future. Fortunately, it is in our power to do so. The greatest risks are caused by human action, and they can be addressed by human action." (Toby Ord, The Precipice)

In the sphere of educational research, we continually aim to find ways to deepen student learning, foster student agency, and promote equity. As we delve into this task, we encounter a range of theories and viewpoints, all of which provoke thought and prompt reevaluation of our established norms. A recent encounter with Toby Ord’s book, “The Precipice: Existential Risk and the Future of Humanity,” has stimulated such reconsideration, expanding the discourse on the role of education in navigating existential risks.

Ord’s masterstroke lies in the urgent need to address existential risks—threats that could cause our extinction or irreversibly cripple our potential. These risks include natural hazards, such as asteroids and supervolcanoes, but are mainly human-made perils, like nuclear war, climate change, and potential drawbacks of advanced AI. Our task is to translate this narrative into the context of our educational mission.

Sale

The Precipice: Existential Risk and the Future of Humanity

Ord, Toby (Author)
English (Publication Language)
480 Pages – 03/23/2021 (Publication Date) – Hachette Books (Publisher)

Reimagining education involves recognizing that the stakes have never been higher. With humanity on the precipice, the school system must incorporate deeper learning, fostering an understanding of complex, real-world issues such as climate change, artificial intelligence, and geopolitical tensions. Students need to grasp the gravity of these issues, discern the links between them, and understand how their actions can contribute to solutions.

Ord’s ideas also resonate strongly with the need to enhance student agency. As we navigate this precipice, the active participation of students in their learning becomes paramount. They must be involved in problem-solving, decision-making, and value formation regarding the issues at hand. Incorporating project-based learning and collaborative problem-solving into the curriculum are ways to prepare our students to address existential risks and steer humanity away from the brink.

The theme of equity is an undercurrent in “The Precipice,” particularly when considering who suffers most from these existential risks. It’s a stark reminder that educational equity is more than just an ideal; it’s a necessity. Students from all backgrounds must have equal opportunities to understand and confront existential risks. To achieve this, we must remove barriers to high-quality education, ensure diverse representation, and empower students with the skills, knowledge, and tools to shape the future positively.

Toby Ord’s “The Precipice” is not a book about education per se, but it holds an urgent lesson for all educators. Our current education system, with its emphasis on standardized testing and rigid curriculums, falls short of preparing students for the existential risks we face. But by embracing deeper learning, promoting student agency, and ensuring educational equity, we can better prepare our students to navigate and shape their futures in this uncertain world.

To paraphrase Ord, we are the stewards of humanity’s future. It’s our responsibility to educate our students with this in mind. Let’s not shrink away from this precipice but rather use it as a springboard to leap toward a more informed, engaged, and equitable education system. It’s not just our students’ futures at stake – it’s the future of all humanity.

FAQ

Q1: What are the main themes in “The Precipice” by Toby Ord?

A1: The primary themes in “The Precipice” include existential risk, the future of humanity, artificial intelligence, climate change, nuclear war, and the responsibilities of our generation to future generations.

Q2: What does Ord mean by “existential risk”?

A2: By “existential risk,” Ord refers to potential threats that could cause human extinction or drastically hinder our ability to reach our potential. These threats could be natural (like asteroids and supervolcanoes) or human-made (such as nuclear war, advanced artificial intelligence, and climate change).

Q3: How does Ord propose we should respond to these existential risks?

A3: Ord suggests that humanity needs to recognize these risks and take coordinated, strategic action to mitigate them. He emphasizes the need for comprehensive research, international cooperation, ethical decision-making, and the prioritization of long-term sustainability over short-term gains.

Q4: How does the book relate to the concept of “student agency”?

A4: Although not directly about education, “The Precipice” can be related to student agency in the context of preparing learners to navigate, understand, and act on existential risks. It advocates for empowering students to become active participants in their learning, equipping them with the critical thinking and problem-solving skills needed to confront these global challenges.

Q5: What is the connection between the book and the concept of educational equity?

A5: The existential risks outlined in the book have unequal impacts on different populations, reflecting the broader issues of global inequality. In an educational context, this underscores the importance of providing equal opportunities for students of all backgrounds to learn about, understand, and address these risks.

Q6: How can “The Precipice” be used to inform educational practices and policies?

A6: “The Precipice” can guide educators towards integrating deeper learning about real-world issues into the curriculum. It encourages the promotion of student agency, collaborative problem-solving, and project-based learning. Moreover, it underscores the necessity of ensuring that all students, irrespective of their backgrounds, have equal access to quality education and the tools needed to shape the future positively.

101 creative ideas to use AI in education: A crowdsourced collection

assorted color great board decor lot — Photo by Tim Mossholder on Pexels.com

The open crowdsourced collection by #creativeHE is a dynamic compilation of 101 innovative uses of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in education, created in early 2023. This collection embodies collective creativity and the spirit of experimentation, offering a range of ideas in their nascent stages that could potentially revolutionize learning, development, teaching, and assessment. It emphasizes the importance of diverse perspectives and a collaborative community of practice, providing numerous examples of inventive AI applications in education.

As educators design new learning experiences and unique engagement opportunities, this collection serves as an inspiration to push boundaries, collaborate radically, and innovate for a transformational student experience. The collection is expected to grow as educators continue to experiment and evolve their practices in the realm of AI in education.

Read the full report here.

Micro-credentials, Open Learning and Transformative Ideas for Higher Education: An Interview with Mark Brown, Keynote Speaker at EdMedia2023

In an interview with AACE, Professor Mark Brown, Ireland’s first Chair in Digital Learning and Director of the National Institute for Digital Learning (NIDL), discusses the potential of micro-credentials, the adoption of Open Educational Resources (OER), and the impact of AI tools in higher education. Brown highlights the disruptive potential of micro-credentials, which could challenge traditional models of recognition and university qualifications. However, he also acknowledges the likelihood of micro-credentials being supplementary to existing macro-credentials.

He emphasizes the need for educational leaders to consider whether micro-credentials are a good fit for their institution and the strategic drivers behind their adoption. Brown also discusses the barriers to the widespread adoption of OER and Open Pedagogy, citing organizational culture, educators’ traditional mindsets, and the political economy of EdTech as significant factors. He further explores the concept of ‘rewilding’ online education, encouraging educators to push new boundaries at the edge of innovation. Finally, he advises on balancing digital well-being for students and instructors in digital learning environments, emphasizing the importance of a ‘Pedagogy of Care’ and the right to disconnect.

Read the full interview here.

Generative Textbooks

David Wiley explores the potential of generative AI, like ChatGPT, in transforming the traditional textbook model. He proposes the concept of “generative textbooks”, which would consist of structured collections of highly crafted prompts that learners interact with, instead of reading static, linear text.

This approach would turn the learning experience into a conversation, allowing learners to ask for overviews, in-depth explanations, personally relevant examples, and immediate feedback on interactive practice. Wiley suggests that this model could enhance metacognitive skills, information literacy, and the ability to ask useful questions. He also predicts that many students might prefer the interactive, open-ended, and personalized nature of generative textbooks over traditional ones.

Read the full article here.

UK universities set out plans to use AI in teaching

The Russell Group, a collective of 24 public research universities in the UK, has published new principles outlining how its institutions will responsibly and ethically use AI technologies like ChatGPT.

The guidelines, agreed upon by all the group’s vice-chancellors, include training staff to help students use AI tools and adapting teaching and assessment methods to incorporate AI technology. The group believes this could enhance student learning experiences and prepare them for real-world applications of these technologies.

However, there are concerns about students using AI to complete coursework and assessments, which some academics view as undetectable cheating. As a result, all Russell Group institutions have updated their academic codes of conduct to reflect developments in AI and clarify when its use is inappropriate. Read the full article here.