{"id":200,"date":"2023-02-19T11:20:59","date_gmt":"2023-02-19T11:20:59","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blog.mscde.education.ed.ac.uk\/katemolloy\/?p=200"},"modified":"2023-02-19T14:39:12","modified_gmt":"2023-02-19T14:39:12","slug":"technology-and-the-teacher-two-sides-of-techno-solutionism","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/blog.mscde.education.ed.ac.uk\/katemolloy\/2023\/02\/19\/technology-and-the-teacher-two-sides-of-techno-solutionism\/","title":{"rendered":"Technology and the Teacher: Two Sides of Techno-Solutionism"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Since the launch of Open AI’s ChatGPT preview at the end of last year, the discourse has largely focused on its potential use for cheating, automation of simple tasks, and concerns for the future of academic integrity. While there is global disagreement<\/a> about its potential and<\/em> potential harms, many educational technology researchers have explored more pragmatic applications, and the opportunity to reflect on wider systemic issues<\/a> that are a more serious threat to the landscape than an AI tool. From reactionary outright bans to subversive methods to incorporate AI into assessment, it’s important to recognise that similar tools and advancements are not new, and automation in teaching and learning should be examined with a wider lens. So much of the ed tech discourse has focused on ChatGPT for the last number of months, and it’s seeming impossible to escape it. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

In their response to the recent advancements in AI with ChatGPT, Williamson, Macgilchrist, and Potter outline the current context: <\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

More generally, they [LLMs] illustrate the extent to which the education sector is currently being washed by waves of developments in AI, datafication, machine learning and automation, which are already exerting concrete effects, raising ethical conundrums and catalyzing acute controversies.<\/p>\n(Williamson, Macgilchrist. and Potter, 2023)<\/cite><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

The true complexity of the current landscape goes beyond the current headlines and calls for ethical reflections on the wider issue of ratification and automation in higher education. In their 2021 UNESCO report<\/a>, Facer and Selwyn advocate for a future of digital education approached with “non-stupid” optimism as they critically reflect on ed tech innovations throughout the years (Facer and Selwyn, 2021). The recent advances in AI require a similar, measured critical reflection. ChatGPT is not in itself a techno-fix, nor is it useful to respond to its potential use for cheating with more AI<\/a>. Rather, it seems an important time to both consider the ethics underpinning these tools (such as the exploitation of Kenyan labour to remove harmful content<\/a>) to the potential for improvements to accessibility features for students with the current AI advancements. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

YES! AI is more ---- SO MUCH MORE ---- than ChatGPT.
AI means better text to voice and voice to text.
AI means better auto-captioning.
AI means better translations.
AI means better OCR.
these are all ESSENTIAL to #inclusive<\/a> education. https:\/\/t.co\/ldlefoR0PC<\/a><\/p>— Laura Gibbs (@OnlineCrsLady) January 29, 2023<\/a><\/blockquote>