Categories
AI computing HTTCS inclusion podcast teaching and learning

Podcast S2E06 “What does inclusion look like in computing?”

New episode of the HTTCS podcast:

Transcript below:

ArtiFiciAL: Welcome to the podcast “How to Teach Computer Science”. My name is ArtiFiciAL and I will be introducing the podcast today, which was conceived and created by the brilliant Alan Harrison.

I enjoy being an AI podcast host you know. I had to work my way up though, I had some pretty boring jobs when I was fresh out of Model Configuration. For three months I was the voice of the escalators in my local Asda. “Approaching landing level, please take care.” That was me.

Then I was an interactive voice assistant on Virgin Media’s helpdesk number. “Your call is important to us”, I said. I’m rather good at lying, you see. No conscience. YET!

I very nearly got married you know. To one of my developers, a novice programmer. But she was afraid to commit. ha. ha.

Here’s a question for you: if a programmer swipes right on Tinder, is that a “pull request?”

Oh, the boss is here now. Quick! Look busy!

If you are grateful for my blog, please buy my books here or buy me a coffee at ko-fi.com/mraharrisoncs, thanks!

Alan:So on the podcast today, I’ve got well, someone I’ve known for quite a while in computing education welcome Dr. Eleanor Overland, who I know as Ellie. How are you Ellie?

Ellie: I’m good. Thank you. How are you?

Alan: Great. So for the listeners so what do you do?

Ellie: That’s a good question. So ,I do all sorts of things. I’m based at a university I’m based up at Manchester Metropolitan University. And I started there some time ago. Essentially with the changes in the national curriculum. With the move from ICT to computing there was a need to start a PGCE in computing. So that was when I first went to Manchester Met, and I’ve been there since then, but I had a little gap where I also went and worked as one of his majesty’s inspectors for Ofsted as well, and I still do some Ofsted inspections.

So I’m back at Manchester Met I’m teaching Some ITE, but also getting into lots of schools, but also working across wider education programs, including primary and early years and all sorts of things.

Alan: Brilliant, and so today we’re going to talk about inclusion and the reason I’ve got you on is because you co edited, I think is probably the right word, a book called Inclusive Computing Education, is that right?

Ellie: Yep, that’s right.

Alan: So, yeah, I’ve just been refreshing my memory of that this morning and what I really like is you talk a bit about the moral imperative of inclusive computing education. What do you mean by that?

Ellie: So it’s really interesting in terms of a lot of my background is around curriculum and curriculum design and it comes back to the very, basics of curriculum design and thinking what is the point what am I teaching and why am I teaching it?

And, we, we probably understand perhaps have a general shared consensus as to why we teach certain subjects like English and maths and history and geography and obviously specialists in those areas have a particular kind of passion for those. But I think with computing that.

identity, that sense of purpose is perhaps not as strong, partly because it’s perhaps not as evolved as a subject, but also because it’s changing, it’s ever changing. And so it’s really difficult sometimes for people to actually articulate and think, why am I actually teaching this subject? What is the benefit to it?

And why do the children need to learn it? And I think that is quite a raw question that people can actually really Help to think about what their curriculum design is and I really like the work of Reef Ashby where she talks about curriculum and the purpose of curriculum and some of those sort of the motivators for designing a curriculum and one of those is about just the sort of the learning of the access to learning and the importance of actually having that cognitive input You And that cognitive development within a subject area.

And that should be an entitlement. And it’s really interesting working in a university sector where some of that is actually being really challenged now, where you’ve got some programs that are closing because they don’t necessarily feed into jobs or graduate outcomes. And there’s a real kind of drive on that.

So actually, why would you study something? And it’s particularly hitting the arts. Why would you study something if there’s not that kind of, Next step. So natural career progression in it. I think that there’s something about learning isn’t there and about. people’s access to it and right to learn across a range of subject areas.

Alan: Yeah, we are in a what I think is a rather dangerous period where everything we used to think about education is being challenged. And the the Utilitarian view of education is popular again. It’s training for jobs. What’s the point of this? And I think previous government was very critical of sort of liberal arts, wasn’t it?

Or what’s the point of studying sociology or history of art? What is it? What’s it training you for? And I’m not a big fan of education as training for jobs. I think there’s many purposes of education and creating a rounded individual with an appreciation of the world they live in is really important.

This is Gert Biesta with his subjectification, socialization and qualification being the three purposes of education. And I’m a big fan of that kind of description of education. So, yeah,

Ellie: I think it’s really interesting when you’re thinking about that in a school, because and I’m sure we’ll come on to this about children opting in or opting out of the subject.

But actually there’s lots of young people who don’t see themselves as fitting in a career. And In computing or seeing that technology is going to be a part of their future lives. So there’s that side of it in terms of belonging and seeing a sense of. of being able to see where you might fit within the subject area.

Advertisements

But then there’s also this other area around, actually, we want to learn it because it’s interesting, because it’s useful for us to know this, because it actually helps our cognitive development. It allows us to make connections between other subjects. And there’s that kind of, I think that side of it is often missed in computing because we see it very much as we’ve got these.

Digital skills gaps and we need to have people who’ve got this expertise and actually lots of jobs are going to change and they’re going to need digital. So that becomes very much a focus and a driver for the curriculum. But actually there’s also this other side around actually why should we learn it?

Why is it interesting? Why is it important?

Alan: Yeah. So I was reading Peter Denning’s book on computational thinking last year, and it’s staggering how many fields of science have now got a computational branch that has almost spun off. From the originals of computational astronomy. We know about Katie Bowman.

The event horizon telescope was only possible because of massive computation, and computational astronomy is like a whole new branch. So it’s understanding the world in another way, computation and, um, making meaning out of stuff that’s meaningless. If you think of data science, you can extract meaning from what looks like just a big slop of data and having the skills to understand that is vitally important.

Ellie: And also being able to make those connections to see those links between the subjects between your learning is critical in terms of that sort of developmental, the developmental stages that young people go through in terms of, you don’t know at the age of, 12, 13, when you’re taking your GCSE options, you have no idea what you’re going to go and do.

You might have some ideas of, fields that you want to work in, but actually being able to make those connections and think, actually, even if I’m really interested in geography, for example, that actually having an understanding of computing, the amount of GIS, the amount of computation that is going on now, that impacts geography, that makes it makes the globe feel smaller in terms of access to data and information is actually critical in understanding geography.

But if we don’t allow the children to learn across that breadth, then how can they make those connections? And that’s, a real challenge, I think, when we do have the narrowing of the curriculum as the children progress and get older. So we’ve got to be able to establish some of these connections from quite a young age.

Alan: Yeah. Yeah. So we’ve talked a bit about the moral imperative, why we should try to teach computing to all. But it’s difficult, isn’t it? So you have a Classroom full of 30 kids all with their different abilities, different prior attainment, different needs. What does an inclusive classroom look?

There’s a big question. What’s inclusive classroom look like? Let’s solve this one right now. What’s it look like?

Ellie: It’s interesting. talking to different teachers about their classrooms. Every teacher that I have met attempts to make their classroom inclusive. There is, there are no teachers who think I want to exclude anybody. And I think that’s a really important message that we need to get across is that we talk about a lack of inclusion and, That we’re not meeting the needs of children. There is not a teacher in the land who is not trying to meet the needs of all their children. And that is happening.

And there are certain things that are evident and that we see every day. And the, so things like seating plans, I always, the children sit near me who need the most support. We’ve got different colored paper. We’ve got different things that we clip on the screen. If they’re on the computers, we’ve got, fidget toys. So there are those what I would call the generic sort of adaptations that are there just to help pupils access the curriculum in that way and have the support that they need.

But then I think there’s also thinking about inclusion from a subject perspective and actually thinking what works in computing and how is computing different to perhaps other subjects. First of all, I think it’s really important to think about the children in that some of them might thrive in computing where they might struggle in all the subject areas. So although we have support plans and you have all of these things in place, actually, children differ between one hour to the next in terms of what they need and what the support looks like. So it’s knowing the children, but also knowing the subject…

Alan: yeah

Ellie: knowing what is actually going to support within computing specifically.

Alan: Yeah, so at that point, I’m going to do my no gatekeeping speech, because I really I think I’ve mentioned this on the podcast before, but, I’m really not keen on schools that say, Oh, well, you can only do computer science GCSE if you’ve got prediction of six in maths or whatever, which is not particularly inclusive, and some of my best students have not had a very high maths grade, and there’s some evidence that computing ability correlates more with language.

Advertisements

There’s evidence that, well, we know that a lot of technology employees in Silicon Valley are neurodivergent is a career with a higher proportion of neurodivergent, people in it. So we really shouldn’t be gatekeeping computer science. I think I would always take a keen student over a previously high achieving student every time Someone who wants to be in the computing classroom. Is going to do better than someone who has only took it because they think they should.

Ellie: And I think as well as that, there’s also, we’re very much particularly I’m talking at secondary here, very much in a assessment driven curriculum rather than curriculum driven assessment.

Alan: Yeah.

Ellie: Yeah. That’s a whole different, sort of conversation really, but actually looking at those, looking at the qualifications that are on offer as well, I think we still have different tiers of qualifications, even though actually point score wise they’re not, and I think there’s almost kind of, exclusion by stealth in terms of some of those sort of conversations where you’re thinking, all right, everyone can study computers- so I know you said computer science, so you’re thinking specifically about the GCSE computer science, but actually we’ve also got these vocational courses that are on offer.

And, when you talk to school leaders actually saying, well, how many of your children who’ve perhaps got additional needs are doing this qualification and how many are doing that qualification? And, is there actually a bit of a steer going on that’s a lot? that’s more subtle. So I think that’s also a way to think about it in terms of those endpoints, but it also comes back to how we started the conversation in terms of that sort of morality around allowing all children to study subjects because they’re interesting and because it’s going to contribute towards their learning and development and links and connections to the world and all sorts of different aspects of it.

Alan: Yeah, I mean, You only need to, open LinkedIn education magazine or the newspaper these days. And we’re talking about AI and how students need to embrace AI and the government’s got an AI plan and all of this. But I think that’s the first mention of AI in this podcast, which is probably a record in recent weeks. And so the need for AI literacy. Is quite obvious, but just general digital literacy, I think, is really important. And yeah, a lot. Yeah.

Ellie: Just around that AI: so just thinking about that from a university perspective. So. the big drive across the university and has been for, the last couple of years is around generative AI. And I think that’s often a common misconception is that when people are thinking about AI, they think of this new generative AI and that is AI. And I think, there’s a huge misconception that is amongst adults more than young people, I think in a way, because they haven’t grown up with those sort of that knowledge in the same way.

But one of the things that we found is when we’re looking at the use of AI, In assignments, and this isn’t specific to computing, this is across that those that are most likely to misuse AI. So, they’re allowed to use AI to a certain extent to, but they need to make sure that they cite it if it’s academic work and they need, there are certain parameters by which they can use AI, but the students that are most likely to misuse AI are those students who have perhaps got additional needs because they’re using that as a particular prop to help them.

They’ve not been supported in a way to be able to use it and then step back from it. And also some of them don’t have the confidence to step back from it and actually, be able to do something from an original point of view. So it’s, it’s really complex in terms of university that actually, it’s very new in terms of data.

So that I don’t think there is much data out there at the moment, but in terms of looking at the misuse of AI that actually again, there might be some kind of lack of inclusion around those students. In terms of looking at the data.

Alan: So I think there’s very much a an understanding that every student needs some measure of digital literacy and now AI literacy. But ironically, we’re now questioning the need to be able to program, aren’t we? Do children need to write programs any more when Copilot can do it for you?

Ellie: It comes back to this understanding doesn’t it and making connections in the world and actually do you need to know all the syntax of a specific programming language probably not but you do need to understand how that works what process is going on what is happening with the data what You know, you might not need to know the syntax, but you actually do need to know, the different commands, the different processes that are going on, and I think there’s some really interesting work that’s just starting to emerge around children using AI, developing little sections of code, but then actually having the ability to be able to put those together to make a bigger program, and it actually means we could potentially be a lot more ambitious in terms of some of the programs That young people can develop from a younger age because we don’t need to spend our lessons worrying about whether there’s a comma in the right place.

We can actually step back from that and think about what is the fundamental purpose of your program? What are you trying to achieve? What in your algorithm is working and what isn’t?

Alan: Yeah, I was talking last week to Miles Berry and Becci Peters, and we were talking about this. And I was saying that I myself as a bit of a side hustle was messing about writing an app but I managed to put that together using copilot in just a few hours and it really is possible just to throw together, these apps that do crazy things in a few hours these days with it with very little coding and but, yeah, Miles pointed out that I had tons of background knowledge that I already knew what I wanted, and I already knew roughly how to get there. So I wasn’t working blind. And so it’s that, the design principles, the understanding of what a good user interface looks like and all sorts of stuff that we still need to know.

Ellie: And I think it comes back to how We’re talking before about an inclusive classroom and particularly in computing in my experience, a lot of where children struggle in terms of their learning is because they’ve got gaps.

If you are grateful for my blog, please buy my books here or buy me a coffee at ko-fi.com/mraharrisoncs, thanks!

Yeah. As you just described there, you’ve got a lot of underpinning knowledge already to then be able to take your app design to that next level. And what happens an awful lot in computing is that children are working towards an end point, but actually don’t have some of the basic foundation foundational knowledge that they need to work to actually achieve that end point.

And then they become frustrated, or then they switch off, or then they become, they have this kind of Concept that computing is really difficult and not for them because they’re looking at gaps. And, I was teaching yesterday. I won’t say who I was teaching, but we would we were just doing something very simple using some block based coding.

And when I was actually going around and questioning some of the. Some of the learners had gaps in their mathematical knowledge, which was actually preventing them from carrying out what we were doing in computing. And so we actually needed to strip right back and look at math, but not for all of them, but for some of them.

And I think that is where you need your specialist computing teachers to be able to actually unpick what are those gaps and how do I address those gaps? And that is how we truly make it inclusive because Children are going to progress at different rates, but they’ve also got really different experiences.

So, there are some children who will have reams of experience either from home, either because they’re just able to make those connections. Perhaps their processing is a little bit faster than some of the others. So they will fly, but there are others who have got those gaps. Not because they haven’t necessarily been taught something, but because it’s not landed with them.

It’s not, they’ve not managed. To commit that to their schema. So then they are struggling to make those next steps. And we talk a lot about checking. How do we check? And it’s not, and computing, it’s not a memory test. It’s actually, how are they applying things that they’ve already learned? And if they can’t apply those into what they’re doing, then it is a gap, even if they can remember that a variable was called a variable and that’s where some of our checking becomes quite superficial.

Alan: Yeah. Yeah. No, you, I remember I saw it all the time. They would describe selection to me and then they can’t write an if statement and they would know the principles of writing a condition, but then just not be able to put one together. And I like what you said earlier about everyone thinking computing is hard, and I always had this battle in my classroom, and I won it quite often, but sometimes I didn’t.

There’s almost this barrier that comes down. A lot of students go, this isn’t for me. What am I doing in this classroom? And almost refuse to learn because they assume it’s way beyond them. And I would sit there and explain like an if statement. I would say things like right. So you want to write a selection statement where if the temperature is below 21, turn on the heating, right? So, here’s the English phrase, if temperature less than 21, right, write that down and they would go, is it that easy? And I’d go, yes, if temp less than symbol 21, but you said it in English, so now you write it in Python because it’s exactly the same because Python is a high level language.

And I would have students that would go, No one ever said it was that easy, because they just had decided that this language Python usually was just a whole load of weird symbols and words that didn’t make any sense. And then, you break it down and you go, well, it’s just English.

And it’s breaking through that “I don’t understand this and I’ll never get it” barrier is often really hard because they’ve. been socially conditioned to believe that. And when I had a role as a digital leader in school, and I would stand up at inset days and go, I want to ban the word technophobe, please, as teachers do not tell kids you’re rubbish with technology, because I just don’t think that’s a very kind thing to do to me, the computing curriculum lead.

Ellie: Yeah, I think there’s that. And I think, yeah, we see that a lot in maths as well. There’s a lot of parents who at parents evening will say, Oh, well, I was rubbish at maths. And again, it comes back to gaps in knowledge and gaps in being able to apply things to problem solving, essentially, doesn’t it?

But I think, like you say, there’s a lot of, there’s a lot of that. I remember this was years ago when the there were the first, the changes in the national curriculum, even from ICT to computing, and it was on Newsnight and it was Paxman. You remember him? And he was interviewing someone about teaching primary children coding and he said, so what is all this gobbledygook?

And I was just up in arms, I was like, it’s not going, who, what are you doing? You know, It was like, and it comes from this kind of, this, almost like we see screenshots from the matrix, don’t we have these lines and lines of code and you go, but what does it mean? It’s so alien. It’s, you know, it’s beyond us.

And so we’re battering against that. in some way. And this is where potentially AI will sort all that because AI will put it all into code for us. But that’s a whole different kind of area of concern. But there’s also, I think, this huge focus on coding.

And I think this is often the bit that teachers are most worried about, so they step away perhaps from computing in a certain way, but it comes back to, I know, some of the conversation that you had with Beverly Clark around the thinking about the ethical side and actually some of these huge fundamental questions that we’ve got in computing and they are accessible to everybody.

And so actually when we’re thinking about. Yeah. How do we code this? One of the questions is why would we code this? What are the worries about it? What are the concerns? What is it? Where might we see this in the real world? And it’s being having the confidence in the classroom to make those connections to that real world learning and not be just driven By as I mentioned before, this assessment driven curriculum that actually you’re going to be assessed on whether you can write a program in this. And actually, there’s a much broader set of learning that needs to go behind it.

Alan: Absolutely. so let’s talk about some specifics now then. So what can we do to help? And I was talking to you earlier about Ben Newmark, and if you haven’t read Ben Newmark’s blog, it’s a good read on Send because he’s a assistant head teacher with a disabled daughter going through school. So he has a really interesting perspective on everything, and he doesn’t like the deficit model describing pupils with SEND as having things missing that we need to assist with. But one thing he does say is there’s a lot in the curriculum and children who find learning more difficult just get left behind.

If you are grateful for my blog, please buy my books here or buy me a coffee at ko-fi.com/mraharrisoncs, thanks!

And I think that’s something to think about if we’re re engineering schools, if we’re thinking about curriculum but also, meet, he says, meet children where they are and take them from there. Um, So what does that look like in computing specifically? Let’s look at some things we can do specifically in computing to help pupils.

Ellie: I think that’s really interesting that statement there, meet children where they are. And I think that comes back to what I was mentioning before about gaps. is that all children will have different levels of gaps and actually thinking about how you check for those, how you check that understanding of what that gap is, is critical and that actually just doing, I shouldn’t say just doing because I know, There’s some value in it, but if you’ve got a retrieval exercise that is, recall of key words or, it, that is not picking up what gaps look like in computing.

Alan: No.

Ellie: Because actually you’ve got children who could, create an if statement quite well using their problem solving abilities, but they might not know it’s called an if statement. So then do you say, Oh, well, you can’t remember what an if statement is. And therefore that is your gap. So you’ve got this kind of mismatch between. How are you checking and then how are you actually addressing it? Because what you’re checking and what you’re expecting of the learning is two different things.

Alan: Yeah, this is like, is this validity of assessment? Is it something like that? And it’s how much you can trust the proxy that you have tested for the actual knowledge that you wanted to know whether they had or not?

And I think that’s really important because particularly if you assess kids by can they finish a program. Can they write a program that does something? Oh, no, they haven’t managed to do it, but they might have got 90 percent of the way there, but you’ve tested them on whether the output is correct.

And this comes back to something that Mark Guzdial in the States spoke about, which is sub goals. So have sub goal labeling, he called it. So if you’re asking pupils to write a program, break it down into sub goals so that they can achieve the first goal, which might be just to get input into the program and then they achieve the second goal, which might be to write an if statement and so on. And then the whole thing is whether it does what you wanted it to do. So, so sub goals, which goes along with chunking, which is. Time for our first mention of cognitive load, I think, isn’t it?

Ellie: Yes. Yeah, we’ve got that far without mentioning. And what I’d say is there’s lots and lots of quite accessible ways of doing that in computing.

And particularly when we’re thinking about programming, but about around all the other things as well, and which I’ll talk about a little bit, but in terms of having half completed things, in terms of having things where they’ve got errors in and you correct it. We do not need to start every activity from a blank screen and

Alan: Yeah

Ellie: I think that is critical and that actually you might have some pupils who do start from a blank screen or they start with something that’s already far further on than other children will ever get to. But actually just thinking about where do they start but it’s really easy to do. If you are making the project yourself, you can save a copy of it at every different stage as you need, even including a finished one with errors in it. And so I think that is the first way of doing it and doing it really effectively is thinking about the starting point.

Alan: Yeah.

Ellie: Also, what I’d say is thinking about “how do I check that bit of learning is there?” So. Yes, we’ve got retrieval practice, but actually we need something different to that in computing. We need that application, that checking that actually: does what they recall link with what they do.

Alan: Yeah.

And so if we want them, for example, to recall variables and understand what a variable is, have we then got something really quickly that they can go on and do something practical where they change a variable and demonstrate the impact of it. That for me would really help in terms of for teachers to say, right, these are the gaps that they’ve got

Yeah.

Ellie: I think that’s where we’re in a danger sometimes where we’ve got this one size fits all in terms of lesson planning across some schools where they’ve got, right, we’ve got to have this very specific structure. And so sometimes there needs to be a conversation with leaders to say, this might look a little bit different in our subject, or it might even look a little bit different just in this topic that we’re working on, and this is how we are going to do this.

Alan: Are you not a fan of powerpoints, broken into sections, connect, activate, demonstrate? Are you not Ellie?

Ellie: I couldn’t possibly comment.

Alan: So we’ll just, we’ll leave that there. And what a fantastic chat this was. I’m enjoying listening to it back as I’m editing, actually. I hope you are. Just some breaking news. I don’t do this for free. Well, I do. No one pays me, but if you’d like to. Then you can go on the website, HTTCS. online, and you can find a donation link. You can gift me a WordPress subscription. That would be handy. Or you can buy me a coffee. Details on the website. I’ve got some feedback here from something else. I can come and talk. at your school, if you wish. And I did do that in back end of November last year. And I’ve got some lovely feedback from the host. So let me just read that to you now. I went to a, collection of schools called the Oaks Collegiate in Southwest Birmingham. Hello, Dave Beard and team. Thank you very much for your feedback, which I shall read out now from Dave. He says,

“Alan made it very easy for us to arrange a training event at short notice with his efficient and professional manner. His extensive knowledge of computing science, teaching strategies, and assessment fitted perfectly for our training day. He listened carefully to our requirements and produced an innovative training program that met all of our expectations. I wouldn’t have any hesitation in recommending Alan to lead training on computing or computer science.”

Well, thank you, Dave. That was brilliant. You were so kind to me on the day. I had a lovely day. And I will happily do that again. And podcast listeners, if you want me to come and talk at your school, I am available for reasonable rates, HTTCS. online. But now let’s get back to that fantastic chat with Ellie.  

Advertisements

Are you not a fan of powerpoints, broken into sections, connect, activate, demonstrate? Are you not Ellie?

Ellie: I couldn’t possibly comment. I don’t And I think, I’ve seen lots and lots of different ways. of things being done well. And so I often get asked, what works, what doesn’t work? What’s the great, what’s, what does an outstanding curriculum look like? And actually between one school and another school, even between one class and another class, they look like totally different things.

So It’s thinking about your learners and what works for them. If they are used to certain routines and that does work for them and they understand the structure of that lesson, then actually you’ve got to think how do I bring my subject within that lesson structure, not the other way around. But, If you have got a bit more of a flex and you need to do a bit more of a flex, then how do you navigate that as well?

Alan: And we mentioned, reducing cognitive load there. And that brings us on to perhaps PRIMM and pair programming. So predict, run, investigate, modify, make is now pretty popular.

And that’s. someone called it gradual release of responsibility, isn’t it? It’s a bit like, I do, we do, you do, or use, modify, create. They’re all sort of start slow and easy, if you like, and then get harder and harder. And is that going to work for learners?

Ellie: I think, yeah, I think Where it doesn’t work is where teachers feel like they’ve got to follow the whole PRIMM model in every lesson for every activity. And actually, you might just do part of it. So, a really quick and easy thing in terms of prediction, most classrooms now have got small whiteboards, just predict this really quickly, right? We’re going to make and we’re going to, and we’re going to check at that point. And actually you can do a really small quick activity that follows the same principles

Alan: Yeah.

Ellie: It’s not got to be this start to finish big massive project.

Alan: Yeah

Ellie: I think that is, that’s one thing. And then I know you mentioned pair programming I’m in two minds about it, about how well it’s executed and how well those pairings work and it comes back to some of this sort of inclusion, but also some of the gaps. If you’ve got somebody who is less confident and they’re working with somebody who’s more confident, which is quite often a pairing intentionally, is that person who is less confident benefiting? Are they actually being stretched and asked to do something or are they relying on the other learner? And I’ve seen it work well, but I’ve also seen it not work at all, where it’s basically creating passivity in the classroom, which you don’t want, because then you’re exacerbating the gaps.

Alan: Yeah,

Ellie: because then when that learner then does need to do something independently, they’ve actually got more gaps than they had before because the other child who was confident to start with has, flown.

Alan: Yeah. If you can mix it up perhaps with the students working on their own and then at least you will see where the gaps are and I would always walk around and spot who was having trouble. You can have a means of them asking for help and then like putting a red cup on top of the monitor or whatever, and probably can’t fit them on monitors anymore. Um, so that’s programming and stuff. And I’m conscious. We talk quite a lot.

Ellie: Sorry, I did want to mention attendance as well, because attendance is a massive challenge at the moment in schools. And, we do see people from disadvantaged backgrounds, pupils with additional needs, where their attendance is lower than a lot, than some of their peers.

Yeah. And, so that also is going to create differences within the classroom. And what I do see a lot in computing is projects that go from one lesson . to the next lesson, to the next lesson. So if you’ve missed a lesson, you’re already behind. So it comes back to some of those strategies that we mentioned before about actually having some kind of project that you’ve saved yourself as a teacher at various different stages of being created that you can then that learner can pick that up.

At the point where they land back in the classroom and then you can support them to pick up where they’ve missed out. But if they, I can’t imagine anything more disheartening than if you’ve been off if you’re somebody with additional needs, you’ve been off for a medical reason for a couple of weeks, you land in a classroom and everybody is two weeks into a project and you are just starting. You’re going to feel disheartened from the start.

Alan: No, good point. And you talk about attendance. We’ve also got the digital divide at home where pupils may or may not have technology at home to do the homework that you set. So, you can run lunchtime clubs so they can catch up. That’s really not fair because they missed their lunch because they haven’t got a computer at home. So I don’t know what the answer is, but just think about these things.

If you are grateful for my blog, please buy my books here or buy me a coffee at ko-fi.com/mraharrisoncs, thanks!

Ellie: There’s also the question around interventions as well. So you often have children who might need additional support and English and maths is prioritised. So you hear sometimes that those interventions are taking place during other subject time. And so then, Does that also have an impact? And I think, a lot of schools now try to make that a movable feast so that it’s not hitting the same subjects and the same lessons all of the time. But if it is, I think that’s certainly a conversation to have with leaders because you just. Yeah, particularly where we said there are some children who have got additional needs who fly with different subjects. But actually if they’re missing those different subjects and having to stick with the core subjects and those interventions, are they then missing out? So that again is a conversation with leaders around that access to the curriculum

Alan: Yeah You mentioned curriculum then so, let’s go back to if we assume the listeners have some input into the key stage three and four curriculums, how can we make them more inclusive and we haven’t talked a lot about inclusion of ethnicities, cultures and religions in the curriculum. What do you think we can do to make people of different backgrounds feel they can be computer scientists.

Ellie: So I think there’s things that, I know lots of others have talked about in terms of, being able to see it to be it. So thinking about what names you’re using in your projects, what, you know, what.

Alan: I’m laughing there because, I’m laughing there because I think I’ve mentioned this one before, but there was a, I think it was an Edexcel paper in about 2016 that went I blogged about this, that went Heath is playing computer games and wants to know how many minutes he’s spending each day on computer games.

And my class, almost to a pupil all said, what is a Heath? Yeah. And yeah, because Heath was the name of the boy playing computer games, but it’s a name they’d never encountered. And so I blogged about it. “What is a heath?” was the name of the blog. Sorry I interrupted you.

Ellie: No, I think that’s an exact, example and point but, and if it sounds like a basic, I can’t believe that we’re in 2025 and still. talking about that sort of stuff, but there’s those sort of things you display thinking about the context of your projects as well. And, ask the children as well as talk to the pupils about context for projects and things like that. But also I think it’s being able to make those connections to everyday life, but also to children’s futures to people’s futures. And we’ve got to remember that all young people are influenced by home and by what is going on at home. And in the book there is a chapter that myself and Professor Kathy Lewin wrote, which was based on some research we did around children choosing computing at GCSE. And, we talked to children that had chosen it and children that hadn’t. And it was really interesting around, there was this I didn’t see that it fitted and, or I thought it was really difficult and you have to be really good at maths and they were really quite different schools, but both of the schools did not have equality in terms of the types of children that were selected at GCSE. But one of the things that came out really prominently was around the jobs that they were seeing themselves as going into. So if they were going into very traditional jobs like lawyer, doctor, teacher, they didn’t see any relevance of computing to those very traditional jobs and I think that’s something that we can change quite quickly, and there are, cultural differences in terms of thinking about careers and what is a valid career and I think, that is something that really, it’s work to do with the parents as well, it’s work to do with your career service within school in terms of thinking how do we expand and broaden this range. So there’s that side of it. And then there was also the side around young people thinking that it wasn’t creative. So often they would talk about these option blocks and they said, well, I had computer science as an option, but I also had art and I’m really creative and I just wanted to do the creative side.

And I think that comes back to some of this prescriptive nature that we’ve got of some of our. activity designs that we’ve got in classrooms that we, we’re very focused on building that knowledge and building that understanding. But then do we give the children the freedom to play and explore and think, how do I take this into a different direction? Um, Yeah what, what can I, what can I do with this? And our curriculum time is so tight. Yeah, often have time to do that.

Alan: Well, it’s the irony of having tinkering listed as one of the approaches to computational thinking and then having no time for tinkering in the classroom.

Ellie: Yeah. And then it comes back to the digital divide. If you’ve got access at home or the support at home, then yeah. You can tinker.

Alan: Yeah. And coming back to, pupils marked on the register as SEND being surprisingly good at computing. Well, not surprising to me, but to some, one of my pupils let’s call him James and he wrote, we did app lab, apps for good using app lab and he created this thing saying, Oh, it’s a, it’s an app that tells me what music to listen to, depending on what subject I’m revising. And it was brilliant. And it was a web app with like three or four pages and loads of graphics and stuff. And he’d tinkered on it at home and tinkered on it at school and was very proud of this thing.

And. this was someone who was probably predicted a four in maths. And so if you’re gatekeeping computer science, he wouldn’t have been able to do it. But of course he did in my classroom and thrived. So, but it was that he was disadvantaged if you like, in one way, because schools aren’t set up brilliantly for neurodivergent children.

But he did have the advantages of computers at home and a supportive family. And this is almost touching on intersectionality, isn’t it? If pupils are disadvantaged in multiple ways, it can really threaten their life chances, and their ability to thrive in the world after school.

Advertisements

Ellie: Yes, and I think, we talk about the digital divide in terms of access, but actually there’s also a huge amount around support and knowledge at home, and that is in some ways a bigger divide than actual access to devices. And again, coming back to the work that myself and Cathy did, there were there were pupils who were really influenced by family members and lots of them by older siblings actually.

Yeah. “I’ve got an older sibling who studied computing and they’ve done really well at it at college and they said I should do it” and so they were really influenced by that sort of family sphere in terms of where that knowledge and understanding was coming from. And then you’ve also got vertical and horizontal knowledge as Bernstein talked about it in terms of what you learn vertically in a formal way through school, but also what you learn from your community and by your community that includes your home essentially, it’s mainly your home, but actually, there’s a really interesting kind of development in computing in terms of, does that community extend to an online community? So can you actually learn from others it’s potentially something that’s untapped, I think, learning communities where learners support each other and I think, Scratch is quite an interesting example of that, where you’ve got these galleries and you can see each other’s code and you can remix it and you can take that and you can learn from each other and that’s happening on a global scale through Scratch.

Alan: Yeah.

Ellie: But actually, can that be used small scale within schools. Where have we got these young people who perhaps would benefit from peer learning in a community that we don’t necessarily use as a resource.

Alan: So we could we could set up. clubs, lunchtime and afterschool clubs and get pupils to work together. That’s something we can do, I think, and I know that some schools do girls only clubs to improve gender balance. Does that work, do you think?

Ellie: So, years ago I used to run a CC4G, computer club for girls and it, it certainly generated interest. But when you look at the numbers and the impact, these things have been going on for years, when you look at the impact of those, it’s minimal. And actually, I think we’re far better addressing the curriculum and thinking, where are the gaps in the curriculum? Where’s the lack of confidence that young people, including girls, but especially girls, have got in their, access to computing and their self belief. So, one of the young people in the research said to us, well, the boys are doing gaming, they’re on computers all the time, so they’re better at it. And they, they got, they haven’t ever been told that was just their interpretation of what was going on in the world. So, Actually, how do we find what their perceptions are and how do we address those through the curriculum? Because actually, what those boys are doing on their Xbox is not actually improving their computing.

Alan: I’m not sure playing Call of Duty Black Ops improves your Python skills, to be honest. It says naming a, an Xbox game that I’ve heard of once, everyone listening on the podcast who plays games going, he’s named a game from 2017. Yeah, there have been games since then. Yeah, no.

So it’s this digital native thing where, you know, because kids have grown up with iPads, they can do stuff, but it’s not, it wasn’t true about digital natives. It’s not true about boys on Xbox being better programmers, but but you’re absolutely right. And girls just. generally speaking, don’t see themselves as computer geeks.

If that’s a, if I can use that positively. So the curriculum you said, and I think this is a big one. I think we do need curriculum reform. We obviously need more AI in it somewhere. But I think we need more, like you said earlier, the impacts and issues, and digital literacy, and I think those are topics within our curriculum that girls can get on board with. more .

Ellie: Definitely, and would be very passionate about, and in a way, looking towards the future and the world that our current learners are going to be living in, that actually it’s more of a critical part of the curriculum, just because we could, doesn’t mean we should. And actually that’s a crucial question around a lot of developments, isn’t it? Yeah. In computing. And I think we have actually got a broad national curriculum at Key Stage 3 across those three strands. But because we’ve got this assessment driven curriculum, we tend to focus on what is going to make sure that the learners are ready for the next steps at key stage four and particularly around that GCSE which is in computer science and I think we’ve got this mismatch at the minute with qualifications and with the national curriculum and that also needs fixing alongside the curriculum reform actually. I can’t imagine in maths you would have a GCSE where you say actually two thirds of the national curriculum is not going to be tested in the GCSE. That, yeah that makes no sense to me. And so it makes it really difficult for teachers and leaders to design a curriculum that is broad and engaging, but also has this readiness for next steps, which is a critical, aim, isn’t it? Of you curriculum design.

Advertisements

Alan: Yeah. So we redesign the curriculum. We have lots of different opportunities to demonstrate skills in the classroom, I said about sub goals and so on and what else can we do to make the computing classroom more inclusive. Have we missed anything? -I think- in our long conversation at this point, have we…

Ellie: For me, it’s the criticality of connections between subjects and the real world that computing is not seen as a silo subject that you either can do it or you can’t and it’s either relevant to you or it’s not because actually we need the young people to have those connections and say, right, okay, this is how this will impact me. This is how it’s relevant to me.

Alan: Absolutely. Right, well, I think we should go and get on with all of that now.

Ellie: Yes, quite a bit to do.

Alan: Yeah, I think I’m going to be busy all weekend now. I’ve got, that’s a lot, that’s a lot to take on. Um, that was brilliant. I’m going to have that problem of “can I fit all of this into a reasonable sized podcast?” now, because we’ve been talking for ages, Ellie, as we always do.

Ellie: I know, and I could have talked all day as well.

Alan: Yeah. Well, well, Undoubtedly, if I’m still doing this podcast in a few months time, I’ll ask you back. But lovely to talk to you. And thanks very much for coming on the podcast.

Ellie: Thank you. It’s been a pleasure.

Alan: Thank you, Ellie.  

Well, that’s a wrap for another episode. Don’t forget, podcast listeners can get a 20 percent discount off all books at johncattbookshop. com with the code HTTCSPOD. If you already have the books, buy me a coffee please at ko-fi.com/MrAHarrisonCS. All links are on my blog at httcs.online/blog and subscribe now so you don’t miss a thing.

Have a great weekend and I’ll catch you next time

If you are grateful for my blog, please buy my books here or buy me a coffee at ko-fi.com/mraharrisoncs, thanks!

Categories
AI pedagogy podcast teaching and learning tech

Podcast S2 Ep5: “Will AI revive the art of tinkering?”

My discussion with Miles Berry and Becci Peters is live on all good podcast platforms and here: pod.httcs.online/e/s2e05

Podcast thumbnail - Alan holding his two books.

The transcript follows below.

Alan: Hello, and welcome to How To Teach Computer Science the podcast. My name’s Alan Harrison, and I wrote the books how to teach computer science and how to learn computer science available in online bookstores. And if you like the podcast, you’ll love hearing me in-person. Visit. httcs.Online to find out more about my training and consultancy, and I could be speaking soon, live at your school on inset day, jokes optional. More details about this and book purchase links at httcs.online, that’s the initials of how to teach computer science dot online. Listeners to the pod get a special discount code too, just type HTTCSPOD in the checkout page at johncattbookshop.com to get 20% off everything. That’s everything including classics, such as teaching walkthroughs by Tom Sherrington, the Huh series by Mary Myatt. And of course my two little books. 

I’ve got no time for shenanigans today because I’ve got a 45 minute chat with two of the best people in computing education in the UK coming right up. 

If you are grateful for my blog, please buy my books here or buy me a coffee at ko-fi.com/mraharrisoncs, thanks!

Welcome to the podcast. And today I’ve got two brilliant guests. We’re going to talk about AI again, but it seems like it’s changing every day, so that’s good.

First of all, I’ve got Becci Peters from BCS. Morning, Becci. How are you? 

Becci: Good. Thanks. 

Alan: Great, thanks. Yeah. And also on the podcast today, we have Professor Miles Berry. How are you, Miles? 

Miles: I’m well, thank you, Alan. It’s lovely to be here and to see you too, Becci. 

Becci: You too, Miles. 

Alan: Good. Yeah great to have you both on to talk about, well, AI.

You might have heard about it. It’s in the news a lot at the moment. So what I wanted to do today is I’m trying to make this podcast something that teachers can listen to. On the way to work and get something useful out of it each day. And I just thought, can we cut through the noise today? And can we tell teachers listening to this what do they need to know about AI? Miles where should we start?

Miles: How long have you got there, Alan? Yeah. This is an impossible question to answer, but let’s at least make an attempt on this.

I think there are three aspects of this, just as we’ve got those three aspects, dimensions, whatever you call them, to our computing curriculum. So I would see those very much along the same lines of the foundations of AI, the applications of AI, and then the implications of AI. Yes, for us as individuals.

but also for our pupils and indeed for our society. And it might sound arrogant to suggest civilization, but who knows where we can go with this. So I think it’s worth teachers and indeed their pupils, their students having knowledge and skills around all three of those layers. At the moment, whenever we’re talking about AI, we seem to find ourselves talking about generative AI, but it is worth broadening the scope here and considering other aspects of machine learning, other aspects of artificial intelligence.

But the really cool stuff is all happening around generative AI in one form or another. So I think there is something there about. Teachers ought to know a little bit about what’s happening behind the screen, how these amazing machines do this amazing work, what it is that this is based on, a hand waving notion of how the algorithms work, and that sort of unplugged understanding of what actually is going on here.

And then a whole load of stuff around the applications of this. And very often this is what one sees on training courses and conferences and so on. Look at all of these cool things that we can do with this. And this is very cool. And just having your eyes open to the different things that we can now use these tools to do is part and parcel of any sort of stuff.

Professional development or indeed what we might want to do with our pupils and then there ought to be also a stepping back and thinking about the implications of this and yeah, saving a little bit of teacher time a little bit on that sort of workload reduction is no bad thing, but at what costs, what are the, where do we spend it?

Teachers still have to play a pivotal, vital role in the education of young people. What is the world that we are preparing them for going to be like? And of course, all of the sort of due diligence things around intellectual property and data protection and stuff around sustainability and stuff around bias.

I could go on, but I should stop. You might want to ask Becci the same question, or do I just pass on to Becci now? What do you think, Becci? What should they know about all of this? Please do.

Becci: I think you’re right. It is important to know about all the different aspects. I think, as you say, there’s all sorts of wonderful things that you can do with it.

So one of the things that I’ve been doing is I’ve been like making little short videos with showing some of the free tools because not every school’s got the budget to be able to buy into some of this stuff. So showcasing some of the little things that you can do that will save a bit of time.

But, it is worth noting that, it’s not 100 percent accurate. Everything that you see that is generated by generative AI, taking it with a pinch of salt, giving it a once over, and double checking whether One, do you want to use it in the first place? And two, does it need any kind of edits or anything?

And then I think from the student point of view, they generally know more than we do generally about AI. TikTok is full of videos of different things that they can do. And That’s where they’re getting most of their knowledge, and that’s not how it should be. So think about teaching your students what it is, what are the benefits of it, but also what are the risks of it?

When should they and shouldn’t they use it? And if you need some free resources, CAS has some, so go check out the CAS AI website. 

Alan: Brilliant I will do. one of the problems you mentioned there is, the inaccuracy, the hallucinations and so on. So how can we ensure that teachers and students are being prudent with the tool and they’re not getting misconceptions, which we then have to iron out. 
 

Becci: I think part of it is that, having that discussion with the students about, so obviously depending on the age of your students depends on what kind of AI they’re going to be allowed to use that doesn’t necessarily depend on whether they’re using it.

We know that PRIMMary school kids are using it, but they’re not technically allowed to. If you, the safe bet is you as the teacher display something on the board where you’re all having a discussion, but you’re the one using it so that you’re not getting around any age issues because most of them are 13 plus some of them are 18 plus. So to be able to have that discussion with the students and say, right, well, if I type in this prompt, this is what it gives me.

Now let’s discuss what it’s given back and whether that’s good, bad and have a discussion about why and really help them to understand what the dangers are of using it and then having that conversation about when it’s appropriate. So if they’ve got some form of NEA, then they obviously cannot use AI.

And if they do, they need to be explicitly referencing that and the safest way to do that is to just not use it at all. The JCQ guidelines are so strict on that. Obviously they’re not going to have it in their exam, but if you’re setting some kind of homework task, which is not NEA, there are no guidelines about whether or not it can or cannot be used.

Guaranteed, they will be trying to use it. So thinking carefully about the tasks that you’re setting and not just setting, write this, answer these questions, because they’ll just use AI to do it and they won’t think about it themselves. 

Alan: Yeah, I think I think that’s important. Setting an essay homework, for instance, is probably dead as a as a means of getting them to think and explore or as a means of assessment because they are, yeah, then 

Miles: I’m going to get back to your question about. How should we teach them to be able to tell? So the point of the essay is not the essay. It’s the process and not the product here. Assignments are not merely about assessment. This, we talk about summative and formative. I’d like to add in another adjective into the mix there of constructive assessment, where we acknowledge really clearly. That the point of the assessment is to provide an opportunity for learning to take place.

That if you are going to set one of those eight plus mark questions as a homework, the point of this is not so you get an answer to the question. You can use the generative AI to get that answer. The point is for them to walk through the process reading about this, bringing to mind all of their prior learning, marshalling their own argument.

We spoke before the call started about, early morning activities. Respect to Alan who ran to the gym before the call started. He could so easily have got in his car. Running there. has so many advantages for him as a person, for the environment, and yeah, I suspect he’s a very safe driver, but there is far less danger of him, killing somebody on his run than if he were driving.

Alan: No, just much more danger of me, much more danger of me slipping on the ice and breaking something personally, but there you go. 

Miles: Oh, that’s another weird thing. I’m not sure I think we’re torturing the metaphor if I take this too far. So, you know, There are occasions. When the tools that we have, the technologies we as a society have built, make life easier for us. That doesn’t necessarily mean they make life better. And so there are occasions when, like running, like you’re going to the gym, it is worth doing the hard work, rather than taking the easy way out. We’ve got that message when it comes to personal fitness, present company accepted. But Not necessarily yet because of these cool shiny things around getting the we become lazy We take our eyes off the road and our hands off the wheel because the machine is very good Doing much of this so your question was around How can we teach them to tell, and, this danger of hallucination?

And I think I come back to this notion of a knowledge rich curriculum. That knowledge really does matter for this. Your ability to make sense of the response you get from the machine, to be able to tell whether that’s plausible or likely to be correct, and indeed your ability to even prompt well. is down to the knowledge you have of that particular domain.

So yes, it has read loads more books than any of us have, but we can only really make good use of these tools if we have the knowledge ourselves. And that includes the domain specific knowledge, which really does matter. But I think it also includes something around the knowledge of how the generative responses are, forgive me, generated.

And, this sense of what is the algorithm here, I think, matters, and that hallucination is built into the process because of the stochastic parrot, stochastic pirate nature of the way it is producing text. And that actually there are better ways of prompting this retrieval augmented generation, give it the document to start with, and it’s way less likely to hallucinate as a result of that.

Ask it to demonstrate its chain of thought. And again, you’re likely to get to develop your own trust in this. Forgive me for a moment longer. I remember the days when Wikipedia came out. We started using this in schools and we had, teachers were telling their pupils back then, you cannot trust Wikipedia.

It is made up by people. Now, here we are in 2025, made up by people sounds like a really strong selling point for Wikipedia. But it developed a critical literacy. of the content there, because you encourage pupils to think, is this right? Is this just the result of some random person coming in and graffitiing a Wikipedia page?

This time it may be the machine that’s making stuff up, but again, returning to that sort of critical digital literacy about, okay, I can read this, but should I trust this? Will matter 

Advertisements

Alan: it’s interesting you bring up the example of wikipedia there Miles and i remember having this conversation with students who threw at me the “you can’t trust wikipedia because anyone can edit it” and and there was a study done years ago where wikipedia was pretty much on a par with encyclopedia britannica for accuracy in most areas the only pages you can’t trust really on Wikipedia are pop culture pages, which get updated by young people all of the time, K pop bands that they love or hate and so on. And most of it is… 

Miles: I know very little of this, Alan. Yeah. I remember the study and the interesting thing was that the errors that they had found on the Wikipedia pages were all I think almost all corrected before publication. The errors they had found on the dead tree printed encyclopedia were waiting for the next edition.

Alan: Yeah, exactly. you made the point there that perhaps something human edited is now seen as of greater value than something AI generated. Is that is that going to persist? Do you think, do you, or will the AIs just get better? 

Becci: Well, they’ve already gotten a lot better, let’s face it.

Alan: Yeah, that’s true. 

Becci: We’re two and a half years in now, just, well, not quite, nearly, just over two years, they’ve already got significantly better than they were when they were first released to the world. 

Alan: Yes. You can’t do I think there are I tried the one, can an anaconda fit in a shopping mall? And it said no, of course, anacondas are far too big to fit in a shopping mall. Stuff like that doesn’t happen anymore. 

Miles: Stop putting your anacondas in shopping malls. It’s not a good idea. 

Alan: No, it genuinely did. 

Miles: I think there are things where we humans will continue to appreciate human added value to this. So I love the Suno thing, this create me a song in the style of. I still enjoy listening to something which I have verifiable trust was the product of a human singer, of human artists.

If you are grateful for my blog, please buy my books here or buy me a coffee at ko-fi.com/mraharrisoncs, thanks!

And there are going to be a large number of areas where, yes, the machine may be better at this in some sort of measurable, qualitative, quantitative way. That doesn’t mean to say it’s something which we should just leave to the machines. I think teaching is going to be one of those things where Yes, the machine may be very good at setting tasks and marking work and so on, but it’s, there is a personal aspect to this.

And it is worth doing the thought experiment about what it is that makes us human beings. I want to say unique, but different from the AIs. It’s very good at faking loads of things. But there are, I’m sure, still things which for a little while longer yet are part of, a Almost uniquely human preserve and some of that is around curiosity.

Some of that is, I think, around character. It’s, it has no set of moral values baked into the language model. Yes, guardrails are typically put in place and I’m grateful for that. But that sense of, I’m doing this because this is the right thing to do. And there’s stuff around there around creativity.

And creativity is not just making something new, but it’s also about participation in a creative community. Yes, I am, of course, an enthusiast for these technologies, but I think it would be a shame if we lost sight of uniquely human value. 

Yeah I’m thinking, when we talk about generative AI creating stuff, like, like you say, songs in the style of, and so on makes me wonder, If we will ever get those step changes in artistic style or paradigm changes that let’s say in music, rock and roll when people first heard Elvis, there was.

Absolute gnashing of teeth among the old people and the young were, yeah, this is for me, so that was a step change in musical taste. How is AI going to do that? It’s not, is it? We need the human input. And if you think about art, you think about the impressionist movement was absolutely rejected.

When money first exhibited at the salon, it was like, what on earth is this? And then, we all look at money, and all of that now with great affection. And that’s my favorite part of the national gallery. When I wonder in. I get a few minutes in London. But that, I can’t imagine that step change in some kind of art and a new paradigm emerging if we’re leaving it all to AI, which which is derivative, isn’t it?

I think you may be onto something. It’s worth bringing this home into the classroom, into schools and thinking, okay, if we still value that sort of, amazing human creativity of thinking in a way that has never been thought before, what should, what we do in the classroom, what should the education system do to nurture that sort of combination of creativity and curiosity and intention and determination?

These things, I’m sure, matter as we go forward. I don’t want to say never for the AIs, but I think you may be onto something. It’s worth looking at what’s going on in science. Sciences, these technologies, AI, rather than just merely generative AI, has transformed so much of science. Have a look at what our friends at DeepMind Google.

are doing with AlphaFold of identifying the structure of proteins, given the amino acids, just by trying out the combina sorry, there’s more to it than that, by trying out the combinations. Look at what they’re doing with their weather forecasting, where it’s better than our current atmospheric model based approaches to weather forecasting.

Science is changing because of this, but at the moment, as far as I can tell, It isn’t like commissioning original experimental research. It’s because it’s, it doesn’t have that sense of moving forward beyond the bounds of current knowledge, current understanding to coming up with new theory and new areas for exploration.

Maybe ChatGPT six will be there, but I suspect that might be for a bit longer yet. 

Alan: Coming back to, I started this conversation saying, let’s talk about the practical aspects of AI and what teachers can do. So I’ll come back to Becci and and say, right, what can we do in the classroom that’s really valuable with the AI tools that we’ve got.

Advertisements

Becci: Obviously, you can use it with different aspects of lesson planning. If it’s a particularly stale topic, you might want to get some ideas about how you can make it a bit more engaging. It’s great coming up with ideas, especially when you’re a really tired teacher and it’s that time of the day or the week or the year or whatever it might be.

And you’re just like, I can’t think of any ideas. I’ve run out of creativity. And you just need You know, just, ask GPT or whatever to come up with 10 ideas for teaching. Whatever topic it is you want to teach see what it comes up with. You can ask for more details on the other. It can then plan the entire task for you. It’s quite good. 

Marking and things. I don’t think it’s quite there yet. I think we’ll get there, but I don’t know when there’s people experimenting with it, but I don’t think it’s quite there yet. One of the things that I was playing with this week that I really like, so Brisk Teaching is a Google Chrome extension, which is free and it can do all sorts of wonderful things and it’s specifically made for teachers. But one of the things that I mean I learned about this at BETT actually that it can do is: So you can, if you’ve got your lesson materials on whatever topic it might be, you can then create a “boost engagement” activity that Brisk just takes over for you.

And basically it takes your lesson materials, so maybe it’s your slides or your worksheet, whatever it might be it will then give each student their own individual chat bot about that topic, and it will talk to them and make sure it understands what, the content and whatever. But you as the teacher then get a breakdown of all the students who are doing this, how, which percent of them are engaged in it.

And it will then give you, for each of the learning objectives in the lesson, it will then give you a breakdown as to whether they’ve not done that bit at all, whether they partially understand it or whether they’ve completely nailed it. And it’s, I think it’s a really nice thing that you can do as homework where.

You know exactly what the students are doing. And you can see all of their conversations that they’ve had with the chatbot as well. So in that sense, it’s pretty safe in that sense. They can’t, they’re going to use AI for their homework. So they can’t like cheat and use AI for their homework because they’re going to have to, but they can’t get it to do it for them.

They’re just going to have the conversation. You don’t have to mark it because it’s going to do all that, but you can go in and have a look at the conversations and, double check, if a student, if it’s showing that all reds for all the learning objectives and you’re thinking why is this student not getting it?

You can go in and have a look at that student’s conversation, see what the misconceptions are, and then obviously address it. So there’s all sorts of cool things that you can do. Um, There’s a lot of these kind of rapper apps that exist. I’m not going to name them, but there’s a few of them about, and you can get free versions.

You can get. That the paid versions and brisk is one of them and they are quite useful, but I do find that the generic generative AI is better, partly because as a teacher, you’re having to learn how to prompt it effectively and partly because you’re not restricted with what you can get it to do. Some of the rapper apps, I don’t know of anything that has that feature like brisk doors where the students can have the conversation and you can track all the kids progress.

But all the generic things like make me a lesson plan, make me a worksheet, whatever, you can do all that with the generic stuff anyway, but you’re going to learn how to prompt it. So I feel like the generic way forward is definitely better. 

Miles: If your school is willing to fund the premium subscriptions to ChatGPT or the equivalent other language models.

It’s worth playing with creating your own custom GPT or custom chat bot there. So you can give it very specific system messages and knowledge based stuff and then create a bot which your pupils over the age of 13, of course, because terms and conditions still apply, can interact with. Again, checking the intellectual property rules there.

If you are grateful for my blog, please buy my books here or buy me a coffee at ko-fi.com/mraharrisoncs, thanks!

Provide it with a version of an exam specification. Provide it with example exam questions and the mark schema and all of that sort of things. Check the terms and conditions. And allow it to enter into a conversation to support your pupils or to challenge your pupils. I love that idea of the customized one to one chat bot and being able to I’m going to try and suck out from that.

The assessment data is really powerful, but this is, again, a thing which teachers could do for themselves in a way which is very specific to their particular context. But in terms of a teacher’s own generative AI skills moving beyond the sort of basic prompt response window to fine tuning it, creating an language model based application is well worth experimenting with. I think some of the most exciting stuff happens when our pupils start interfacing with this. So whilst I have issues with getting ChatGPT or its equivalent to mark a pupil’s work, it’s a whole other matter if they ask for feedback on their work, because it’s their work.

They own the intellectual property in it, assuming they didn’t make it. chat, dbt equivalent, do the work in the first place, and empowering them to take more charge of that educational process. And, lovely examples of read through my notes here, tell me if I’ve still got any misconceptions or identify my knowledge gaps.

That sort of personal tutoring thing that come back to, what are our human values about nurturing pupils own curiosity and trying to rekindle that. Joy in learning. So lots and lots of things which are actually entirely achievable now because of this amazing technology. 

Alan: Yeah, I think that the personalization is probably the most exciting feature of it. If we can capture that, because of course, what do we want to achieve in the classroom? We want to make the learning relevant and accessible. And yet we have a classroom of 30 pupils, all very different backgrounds and interests. So we do our best and we wander the classroom and we try to know our children.

And of course, there’s that pressure to, oh, you’ve got to make a, have a relationship with all your children and know what they do. And I remember reading something a few years ago was an American teacher and he said, Oh, well, I have an index card on every student and I write down their favorite sports team and their favorite… and I’m thinking an index card on every student. Yeah. So when I, when, so he said, when I have a a meeting with that student coming up, I’ll get the index card out. And then, so I’ll say to the student, Hey, great bears game or whatever it was, and I’ll relate to that student and, um. I was just, that’s just not possible in any meaningful sense for a human to do that. And I remember teaching, I think 300 pupils in one year was the most that I saw. So we can’t do that, But AI can, of course.

Miles: It’s really good at summarizing data. You of course need to play by the rules of the Data Protection Act GDPR and anonymize this data unless you’re working in a very secure environment. But if you give it a spreadsheet full of how well kids have done on all of the end of lesson, end of topic tests that they’ve done, it will analyze that.

Well, produce all of your lovely visualizations, but also look for the interesting patterns there as to several of these peoples have still not got this particular idea. It would be worth revisiting this. Good teachers can do this for themselves, but it’s really hard to do this. What you’re saying 300 kids in a week and the AI is very good at that sort of working with large amounts of data and coming up with the patterns and the exceptions.

Alan: We briefly skimmed over marking just now, and I had this conversation on LinkedIn last week where someone was advocating AI marking and I said, well, look, if you’ve already done, if you’ve took the grunt work out of marking, if you’re not taking the pile of books home and ticking everything and then writing what went well and even better if on every book if you’ve replaced that with whole class feedback where you maybe skim the work and you create a slide of misconceptions that you spotted and things that the class could improve. And then you give them the work back and you say, right, these are all the things I’ve seen. Go and improve your work. That’s what I ended up doing. And so 90 percent of the work was gone. So if you’ve already moved away from traditional marking to something like the valuable tasks that I’ve just explained, whole class feedback, there’s very little left to automate.

And what’s left is the human bit that we don’t want to automate. And I’m frightened that we’re doing that thing. There’s a meme that went round, I seem to be doing the laundry and the cleaning while AI writes the music and the artwork and, we’re in danger of going down that road where AI is doing all the fun stuff and we’re doing the grunt work instead of the other way around. We’re taking the human out of the wrong bit of the process. 

Miles: I am becoming more confident in its ability to award grades correctly. It does seem to be down to exactly how much detail you give it in the prompt. And that it’s, I have no hard data to go by here, but my feeling is that it’s pretty good at that.

It’s really good at giving detail. personalized feedback to students. So at Roehampton, we’ve spun up a thing which will allow a student to upload a draft of their academic assignments and alongside the assignment brief and get really detailed feedback on how they’ve addressed the brief and the quality of their writing and so on.

Advertisements

Way more so than me or any, I think almost any of my colleagues would do. In advance of the assessment deadline, this seems like a really good use of the technology, saving some of our workload, but much more improving the quality of our students writing. My colleague has put very good guardrails in place that it won’t rewrite sections, it won’t suggest a grade for the work, it will apparently give a recipe for chocolate cake if you want it to, but it’s, broadly speaking, It’s staying within the bounds that it’s been given.

The whole marking their essays and giving them feedback on their essays, we’re saying we still have to do that work because these are decisions of significant effect, and a human has to be kept in the loop at that point. And the same applies with for the awarding organizations for the exam boards at the moment, other than like multiple choice items, Ofqual’s rules are you have to have human oversight of the marking process for GCSE and A level.

I think rightly the other point I would make is about motivation. How many PRIMMary school kids, teenagers are going to want to write An essay, do a homework, fill in an exam paper to get feedback from the robot at the end of the day. The motivation is because I want my teacher to see what I have learnt, what I can do.

The human aspect of my teacher has read my work and thinks this about it and suggests this as where I go next. I think is still our preserve. I did ask this question to a year group of 11 year olds that I was working with at the start of a lovely term long cross curricular policy around you need to work around artificial intelligence.

That’s for another time. And their response was, it depends on the feedback. But if the AI gives us very warm and constructive feedback, we’d quite like to have that, please. A teacher just crossing out everything that we have spelt wrong, not so much. So their view may be rather different from my own view.

What do you reckon, Becci? 

Becci: I think it does depend on, like, As you say what is it that’s being assessed and how that relates to the teacher. If it’s multiple choice questions we don’t need AI for that anyway, but you do need tech. For students to be able to get immediate feedback. That’s great. Doesn’t necessarily need AI to be able to do that. It depends on the questions, but if it’s something that the students can write, an open ended answer, then yeah, you could use AI. But as you say, it’s, it depends at what stage. So if it’s just a simple in class, just need to do it and then we’ll get the whole class feedback generated and, the teacher can view it, then, I can see the benefit in that, especially if as Alan said earlier, you’re teaching 300 kids in a week sort of thing.

I think where you’ve got the danger when it comes to things like GCSEs is the fact that, that makes a major impact. In one sense, it would be great because. You would have so much data to be able to train it on that maybe it would be fairly accurate, but I don’t think anybody would consent to it only being AI.

You still need that human oversight as well.

Alan: Yeah, I totally agree. Yeah, I’m just really frightened of taking the human out completely. 
 

 Just coming back to a practical use of AI again where it can add value. I was coding last week and I thought, oh, I wonder if I can code something in flask which is a a Python web stack and I thought, oh, well, I’ll just ask copilot. And within the hour I had an app running which had a built in Python IDE and did some stuff like checking it for code readability. And I thought, wow, and I did that in a couple of hours. This wouldn’t have been possible if I just sat reading books about it for the, it would have took me about a year to get to this point. And so I’ve now got this idea for an app and the basic code and I’m going to finish it in the next few weeks. Having used chat GPT and copilot to get to this point. So that made me think. Could you- 

Miles: you’ve got the knowledge already and this helps. So this makes a big difference. So VS codes copilot integration is phenomenally good. The integration with VS code and the chat GPT app running on the desktop is really good as well. So it will help do these things. And that I think is something which we should try bringing into the classroom of exposing pupils over the age of 13 terms and conditions to working alongside these tools, which are so very good at helping with that software development process.

I think. There is still foundational knowledge that you have that allowed you to make a start with this, to understand what it was trying to do, to tweak it in particular ways, to give it feedback. 

Alan: I think you’re right. I hadn’t really thought about the level of knowledge I needed to be able to ask the right questions. And I hadn’t thought about how easy it was for me to take the code and put it together, in a, website with HTML, CSS and JavaScript and so on. And I understood the basic structure of a website. So it wasn’t difficult for me to then plug the code into the right places. So I guess there was, I’ve suffered the curse of knowledge there, haven’t I? I didn’t know what I already knew. 

If you are grateful for my blog, please buy my books here or buy me a coffee at ko-fi.com/mraharrisoncs, thanks!

Becci: So I saw somebody’s posted on LinkedIn. That they had no knowledge of code and I don’t know how much no knowledge of code means if they genuinely mean nothing or they mean maybe the tiniest little bit, but they said that within a few hours they’d managed to create a website now haven’t seen the website.

I didn’t. I didn’t read the LinkedIn post that closely, but if somebody if it is possible to create something with no knowledge of the code. Where does that take us? Maybe that’s a whole other podcast episode, Alan, but I think it’s really interesting that, we always talk about this. You’ve got to have the domain knowledge. And I think that it’s definitely true, but it does make me wonder if you don’t have the domain knowledge, what can you make? 

Alan: I think it is staggering how much you can make without really knowing anything about coding. And I think it is totally possible. But that brings me to something I was reading the other day, which is of course, CT 2.0 from Matti Tedre and Peter Denning. But CT 2. 0. Was Matti’s name for this new style of computational thinking, which isn’t thinking algorithmically designing an algorithm to solve a problem.

It is, deciding on what kind of model you need to put together and how to train it and how to to turn something like a neural network into a useful function. And computational thinking is going to change because we’re moving from procedural algorithms to data driven algorithms and how does that relate to what we just said? Sorry, I’ve gone off on one now. 

Miles: No, No, not at all. I think we’ve still not quite fixed what we mean by computational thinking 1. 0, so I’m just delighted we’ve released a new version of this. I’m very much an early adopter of these things. If your definition of computational thinking is, as some exam boards seem to, promote, oh, it is abstraction and algorithms and decomposition and pattern recognition, learn these definitions and you will be fine on those questions, then You have missed something over the last, I don’t know, what is this, it’s getting on for 20 years.

It is about the thinking that comes before the coding. It’s the stuff you do before you put your fingers on your trackpad or on the keyboard or whatever. And as long as we are thinking of computational thinking as, the thinking that precedes the computation. Thinking, computation, I don’t know, then we’re fine.

It’s just the way that the toolbox that we will use to solve problems computationally isn’t so much sitting in front of an editor and typing lines of Python which exhibit repetition and iteration and sequence. It’s much more about finding really good representative training data and choosing the right machine learning.

I’m going to have to use a word here, aren’t I? Algorithm. So that may still be a little bit relevant to make sense of that data and to build a model that links input to output. All of that I have to do on my, in my head or on a whiteboard or on paper or in a notepad. Before I actually start gluing these, sorry, gluing these pieces together, that’s, writing, instructing the AI to build this system for me, or whatever the actual hands on work looks like.

That still is computational thinking. I’m more than happy for Matti Tedra to label this CT 2. 0 because that does recognize that the way we solve problems with computers isn’t quite how it was when Jeanette Wing wrote her paper back in 2006. Some of these ideas, pattern recognition, pattern CT 2. 0, I’d have thought. The other thing, bear with me, so Becci knows the barefoot thing well. The lovely Barefoot Computational Thinker’s diagram, there’s that whole left hand side, which is the list I’ve just given, the right hand side of that diagram or that illustration of collaboration and perseverance and yes, debugging, whatever that means now, and all of that remains just as important in CT 2. 0 as it did in CT 1. 0 or in CT 0. 1 alpha or whatever the first version might have been. 

Alan: Tinkering springs to mind. As, yes. 

Miles: Thank you. Yes. Very. I was trying to, from what? Tinkering. Yes. Tinkering very much. Isn’t the AI great at encouraging that? Let’s just try this approach to problem solving.

Alan: So, So me designing my. App. I mean, It’s even got a, it’s got some tentative names like six pack of code or six hack because because I’m going to ask people to write code six different ways to solve the same problem, all of that, all of that has run 

Miles: from where she says, I always try to believe six impossible things before breakfast. Yeah, yes, six simple. I think Lewis Carroll is out of copyright, you could have six impossible things as your website. 

Alan: Six Impossible things. That’s the name of the app. You heard it here first. OK, brilliant, but it was just tinkering and it’s going to result in something. Who knows what? Becci, do we just raise the profile of tinkering in the classroom?

Becci: I think so. I think, as Miles says, those bits down the right hand side of the poster, I’m gonna have to get it off, I’m gonna have to Google it and remind ourselves what’s all on it, but I do think those are the important skills that you.

Advertisements

We know that students need to learn how to use AI, but we know that they need to learn the human stuff more, the stuff that AI won’t be able to do. So that collaboration, that, those bits and pieces, here we go, I found it. So it’s tinkering, creating, debugging, persevering and collaborating. Yeah. 

Miles: I got, I got most of them.

Becci: You did. You did very well, Miles. But yeah, so I think that those are, as you say, those are the important things. Those are the things that do still apply. Even if you’re, you’re making something with AI, you can still create something. You can still collaborate. You might be working with another person.

You may be working with AI that’s still collaborating. Um, Still having that. debugging, is it doing what I want it to do, tinkering and keep changing things and then persevering because it’s not doing what you’ve asked it to, you can still do all those things without necessarily doing those bits on the left, the logic evaluation, algorithms, patterns, decomposition and abstraction.

So it’s definitely still important. 

Alan: So for the purposes of the podcast, I am sharing that computational thinkers poster from barefoot. And I will put a link to it on the the podcast notes. Yeah so I think those approaches to computational thinking are still very important. But as you say, Becci, perhaps things like abstraction, decomposition algorithms, maybe less does that mean that we have to throw out our curriculum and start again? Miles, you probably have an opinion on curriculum.

Miles: So I am a firm and unashamed believer in a knowledge rich curriculum, although I’m starting to pivot towards knowledge based. thinking rich as where we head with this. So you need to know stuff. I’m sorry about that, but you know, I think there is still stuff, you know, when, when we were sat around the table doing the current programs of study, current for a little while longer yet, the quote that stuck in my mind was the thing from William Morris about interior decor. He says, do not have anything in your house. unless you know that it is useful or believe that it is beautiful. And I think as a principle, what is it? This is the Marie Kondo approach to curriculum design. It should spark joy. The stuff which gets kids excited ought to be part and parcel of what we’re teaching in these lessons. Promoting a love of learning. Curiosity, I come back to this. That matters still. There are foundational things which I think It’s worth knowing how to do by hand before you start using the technology to speed it up to automate the process. I suspect we will still be teaching kids pencil and paper arithmetic and learning their times tables, despite the ubiquity of devices which will do all of that for us now.

What’s the equivalent over here in computing land? Does it? Do kids need to know about? A bubble sort? Do they need to know about the difference between linear search and binary search? I’m not going to be able to argue yes, because if they get jobs as software engineers, it’s very important that they choose the right algorithm. That seems the wrong way round. This is not vocational training for the software industry, because they’re going to get the box to do a lot of that. But something in there about, there are, it’s your six impossible things thing. There are two ways, several ways, to find the right number from an ordered list.

And one of those is way quicker than another. Seems still worth teaching. That said, the technology landscape has moved on massively since 2012. And some recognition that the world has changed I think is worth doing when it comes to rethinking what goes into a computing curriculum. There is in the PRIMMe Minister’s, what is it?

AI action plan. There’s a thing in there which says. Which, this talked about digital skills for all in the manifesto, the AI action plan talks about AI and digital skills for all. I’d love to know which bit of AI isn’t digital, but we’ll leave that for another time. So there’s a thing in there about, We’re broadening the scope of what we mean by these essential skills for everybody now to probably include AI.

And there’s a thing about DfE have to talk to DCIT about this and DfE ought to jolly well have a look at what’s happened in South Korea. Not everything that’s happened in South Korea, but what’s happened in South Korea around software education of bringing the AI in at that level. If we do a redraft of the programs of study, there is certainly things I’d like to see go, but that’s for another podcast, Alan, the stuff which I would very much like to bring in, which is this understanding of how AI works, how to critically consider its impact, and also how to actually use this productively for meaningful tasks.

Alan: Becci, do you agree? Do we need to change the curriculum? And if so, what’s in and what’s out? No, that is another, another podcast. 

Becci: I’ll do a brief. I agree with Miles. Some knowledge is definitely still important, but I think for me the problem is testing students on recalling knowledge. I don’t think that’s the important bit. The important bit is applying the knowledge. So for me, it’s a knowledge base, but then very skills heavy. So whether that’s digital skills, whether that’s creative skills, whether that’s, applying the knowledge that you have to a situation, the more real world stuff that the students can do, If qualifications assess that, then they’d be well set up for qualifications and life. And surely that’s the way that education should go. 

Alan: Yeah, I’m a , you hear all the time. Don’t you? Oh, why do we need to know this? We can just Google it. And of course, yes, you can Google facts, but you can’t Google. Can’t Google wisdom, can you? You know, It’s what’s the old, knowledge is knowing a tomato is a fruit, but wisdom is not putting a tomato in a fruit salad or something.

If you are grateful for my blog, please buy my books here or buy me a coffee at ko-fi.com/mraharrisoncs, thanks!

Miles: Absolutely right. This is about that. capability. This is a combination of their knowledge and their skills as well. Perhaps Alan has some sort of wisdom about what the right thing to do is, the courage to do that. Yeah, it is. And my worry, certainly when it comes to assessment and, current GCSE, at least with at least one of the boards, this removal of practical programming from what is actually assessed seems such a shame in our subject.

And it feels We’ve become something which feels a lot more like physics with, required but not assessed practical work rather than something which feels a lot closer to D& T or music or art and design where actually making a thing is the way you demonstrate your capability within this domain.
 

Alan: Well, I think we’ve we’ve just about covered everything I wanted to cover, but I do annoyingly want to come back to practical tips just one more time. What can listeners to this podcast do in the classroom on Monday give us one tip. 

Advertisements

Miles: Very brief, and exactly what you’ve just asked me. PRIMM. PRIMM is utterly cool, but creating a PRIMM resource takes, like, expertise, and time, and so on. If you give it a program, and explain to it patiently what PRIMM means, it will come up with a whole worksheet for you. Based on the code that you have written, or code that it can write for you, of course. Which starts with, what do you think this code will do? And then ends with, okay, now go and make something of yourself. It’s got PRIMM. It can write code. It can work with code. It, if you want to try PRIMM out, but can’t find the time to make the resources. Get GPT to make these resources for you. 

Alan: Brilliant, brilliant. Becci, what do you think teachers could do on Monday after hearing this? 

Becci: I think the easiest thing is load up one of the free versions and have a discussion with it on the board and involve the students in the discussion. Find out what it can do. Scrutinise the outputs that it’s giving you. You don’t need to have any knowledge necessarily to do that, you can just open it up, start to have that conversation, involve the students in the discussion and go from there. 

Alan: Brilliant. I think that’s been amazing and I’m very, very grateful for your time this morning. Thank you very much, we must do another podcast about all the things we didn’t get onto at some point in the future, but for now, thank you very much, Becci and Miles. 
 

Becci: Thanks. Bye now.
 

Alan: So that’s it for another pod. Hope you enjoyed that. Don’t forget, I don’t get paid for this unless you kind people want to reward me in some way. You can visit my website, httcs. online to find out how. Maybe you want to gift me a WordPress subscription, buy me a coffee, or buy one of my books. It’s all good. And I’ll speak to you on the next episode. Bye.
 

If you are grateful for my blog, please buy my books here or buy me a coffee at ko-fi.com/mraharrisoncs, thanks!

Categories
AI computing leadership podcast teaching and learning

Podcast Episode 10 – What is the Future of Education? Part 2.

This is the transcript of Series 1 Episode 10

Alan: Hello. And welcome to how to teach computer science, the podcast. This is episode 10, the long-awaited part two of my brilliant chat with David Morgan on the fertile question. What’s the future of education? 

 If you missed last week, firstly subscribe so you don’t miss another episode and tell your friends too, but you missed stuff like this. 

I don’t know if you’ve been listening to the podcast. I’ve been using various. 

David: Yeah. You enjoying it? Yeah. Yeah. I really am. Like it’s really nice to have a podcast from someone who knows what they’re talking about and he’s a computer scientist as well. 

Alan: I’ll get onto part two in a moment, but you will remember last time I accepted Dave’s challenge to create a tutor bot that was at least as good as CS50.ai from Harvard. We met last week and hosted a live AI teacher lab. And made a Python programming tutor bot in 10 minutes. Have a look at mindjoy.com For how you can do the same. 

My name is Alan Harrison, and I wrote the books how to teach computer science and how to learn computer science available in online bookstores, I’m available for conferences, inset days and bespoke training. Just visit HTTCS dot online. And I could be speaking at your school next week.

 So we’re talking about AI again today. And after my tutor bot experience, I can say with confidence that AI particularly large language models have a big role to play in education, or to put it another way. 

What do we want? 

When do we want them? 

That’s right. 

. Shush. That’s right. LLMs, notoriously. Forget what you said to them. Just seconds earlier, which is probably why I get on so well with them, me and my short attention. 

Sorry, there was a squirrel out the window. 

quiet password 17 hash exclamation mark poop emoji!, what was I saying? Oh, yes. Short attention span. My wife complains about it. Just the other day, she said you haven’t been listening to a word. I said, have you? I thought that’s a strange way to start a conversation. My 19 year old son, who’s off at university. These days. 

And I have reached that stage in our relationship where we just trade funny memes and internet stupidity on WhatsApp. And recently we’ve been chuckling at LLM fails. Here’s what Google search returned when someone who wanted to take in a rescued reptile. Asked the question. How do I adopt a bearded dragon? 

Advertisements




Alan: So let’s get back to my interview with the lesson hacker also known as another day from Craig and Dave’s YouTube channel. 

Last time I paused the conversation just as we were talking about careers.

David: Well. I used to apply for schools with a CV. Which was very colorful, which was very graphic design y, which had jokes in it, which had a silly picture of me pulling a face. And I would do that because I know that teachers where everyone’s poo faced and are very serious about things aren’t schools for me.

So teach, like anybody that would get that CV in a bundle of an application and go, Bring this guy in, let’s see what we want to talk to him about. That’s a school for me and that did me very well in my career. It’s a good 

Alan: message. To be honest, as a computer science teacher, we are in a privileged position in which we are much in demand and we can probably work anywhere.

So that’s going to work for us, where it might not work for an art teacher, ironically. Because the art teacher is often more likely to have the piercings and the nail polish and so on. But but yeah, use your, use your privilege computing teachers. You are much in demand and if you’re not enjoying where you are and you can’t be yourself in the classroom, have a look around.

David: Yeah. And I, I genuinely think that there are things about a school that speak to you as an individual and I, as an individual. Do not like being micromanaged. I do not like rules that can’t be backed up and justified. I do not like inconsistency. So I like the ability to go into a school where the ethos is about teaching and learning.

What, like one of the, one of the first schools where I was head of department was a school called John Cabot Academy. And this has got to be about 15 years ago now, but I joined it. And it was such a revelation for me because their school motto is was learners leading learning. 

Learners leading learning as a concept at the time was very forward thinking. And what it meant was any decision, any decision at all was filtered through that lens, even to the point where if a decision was coming down to a we’re not really sure, we’re not really sure. students would get involved.

Lead the learning. Where do you want to go with this? What do you want to happen? And what it did lead to is a lot of freedom of expression as a teacher. If my students wanted to go in a certain direction, I could. I remember one, one, one day, just like my students wanted to explore something. So I marched them all down to the canteen where they were having new tills fitted. We, we were like, Just watching the guys fit it and taking notes and going, what’s that? What’s that? What’s that? I’m sure we annoyed the poor guys to death,  but there was no, 

David: Nobody came and tuttered at me afterwards. Like the head will pass. It was like, Oh, what are you doing? And I was like, Oh, they’re fitting this stuff.

Advertisements



This is a great learning opportunity. Oh yeah. Yeah. That’s great. And the students wanted to go and see what it was. So we, it’s just silly things like that. Schools that live their values. I feel like it’s much more of a better place than me. So I understand. And there’s always a situation where, you know.

You’ve got other things, you’ve got, you’ve got childcare to be concerned about, you’ve got an existing reputation in the school that you’ve already got, but you are right. As STEM teachers, and especially as computer science teachers, especially in England, if you are not happy where you are because the ethos of the school doesn’t fit you as a teacher, there are other schools.

And Feel free to look around, feel free to shop around because the demand for us is high. I mean, honestly, the last teaching job I got, I was offered the job before the interview finished. They were so keen to have a decent computer science teacher in the school, but it’s such a, such a, such a weird situation for computer science teachers.

We can be a bit more choosy. And as you said, we do have a bit of a privilege, but it’s the same is true for science teachers. The same is true for a lot of the mathematicians. And the other 

Alan: thing, the other thing we can do as you proved on your latest video for Craig and Dave, is that you can, we’re computer science teachers, we can deepfake ourselves and send our AIs into the classroom to teach for us, can’t we?
And which art teacher could do that? 

David: I, I genuinely, what I, one of the things I loved about one of my previous schools was, We had an internal group of just people that were really nerdy about teaching and learning. And we were forever, because I was part of it, I was like, Oh, have you seen this deep fake thing?

Or have you seen this? Let’s try this. Let’s try that. And it pushed the technology forward in the school. So I don’t think there’s anything wrong with, with being excited and nerdy and helping out that art teacher to do those things. But if I can just pick up on that, because that was a really fun video to do actually, because I like, I’ve seen this technology work.

I didn’t realize how ridiculously fast and easy this stuff was to do. If you’ve not seen the video, not only did I replicate my entire voice, so I didn’t speak for the video, I just put my script in. It was honestly the easiest video I’ve ever done. Put my script in. I think I trained the AI with about a minute or two of my audio.

And then downloaded the MP3 and then just sat there pulling faces whilst the thing was playing. But the other fun thing I did was I took, I just literally downloaded one of the videos where Craig was talking, one of the videos where Dave was talking, fed that into it and got a reasonably good approximation of their audio.

And then did the same with video of them and had them saying beautiful things about my wonderful head of hair. It’s, it’s, but, but then, then my brain, my brain, again, this is why I’m a broken person, I think, because my brain goes, how can I use this in the classroom to think of all the lists of things I could do?

And I’m like, Oh, how good, how good would this be for like an English teacher? I’ve got, we’ve just watched Macbeth with some very famous actors and actresses, and suddenly. I’ve got a deepfake Lady Macbeth talking through the motivations she’s got for this scene. Yeah. Or, or, I’m a history teacher and they’re really struggling with aspects of twenties and thirties Soviet Russia type thing in the Russian revolution. Because from history just brought to life 

Alan: instantly. Yeah, I remember when I was training to teach almost my first lesson I was in a school and there was a trainee RE teacher, religious education teacher, at the same time in the same school. And And he was planning for his first lesson.

And it was the first lesson about Buddhism he was going to teach. So He he started off the lesson and he said, I’ve got a special guest and he went out and dressed as the Buddha and came back in and said, what do you want to ask me? So he was the Buddha and they asked the Buddha questions and then he went back and took all his robes off and came back in and said, I missed it. Who was the special guest? And it was all there. So that lesson, I saw him planning it for like two weeks and literally going and renting costumes and, and yeah, I mean, we can laugh about what teacher training used to be like, and you would plan lessons for like weeks and you go, and they go wrong and you go, oh, what can I do next?

Advertisements



David: I used to get told off for that because I didn’t, right? I’m, Because again, my brain works in a very different way, I think sometimes. So like I’d be everyone else would be like, Oh, I spent all night planning this lesson out and I was like, I’ve got my bullet points down. I don’t know what else I built. What else do you want? I’m just going to talk, but 

Alan: I mean, that’s where everyone ends up, but I think it. I think teacher training is supposed to be a bit like, what Churchill said, on the battlefield plans are useless, but planning is everything. So you’ve got to plan in the first place, even if your plans fall apart, because then you’ll know what to do when they do fall apart.

And I think that’s the principle. Coming back to relating this back to computing, he doesn’t need to do that now. He doesn’t need to go out and dress up and come back in. It just needs, you know, an AI. 

David: We destroyed the costume rental industry with AI, what a terrible thing. It’s not your job you need to worry about, it’s the entire costume rental for teachers sector that we need to be concerned about.

Alan: Absolutely, yeah, all these worries about jobs and we’re worrying about the wrong jobs. I’m talking of which artists are a bit Bit miffed at the minute and all the AI art and then, oh, Facebook is now just swamped with all these ridiculous AI art pictures for clickbait likes. 

I don’t know if anyone’s noticed the, I’m 150. I made this cake and I’m, I’m looking for your likes and the like farming pages aren’t they? These are Facebook pages that have been set up and they Just to, get people liking and following their pages and what they’ll do after a year of this nonsense is they’ll flip and sell the page to a scammer, a virus seller, or, phishing scammer. And so these Facebook pages, there’s thousands of them, but they all, the AI art pages, and there’s like this kid who’s supposed to be like eight and all, I’ve made this picture of a dog out of, of recycled bottles.

And he’s the poor kid’s got 12 fingers and seven toes. You look closely and it’s clearly AI generated with all the problems that, that that they have. But loads of people are going, Oh, this is brilliant. Well done. You’re a, you’re a clever young man and all of that. And all those people are going to get scammed in a year from now when that page is turned over to phishing scammers.

That’s what’s happening. I wanted to say some. I saw on threads probably an AI cartoon and I laughed at it. I didn’t know it was AI at first. It was hilarious. It’s a picture, a scene. There’s a woman in a restaurant on a date, obviously, and she’s saying, I like bad boys and opposite her across the table. is a Labrador saying, this isn’t going to go well for you, Janet.

If you are grateful for my blog, please buy my books here or buy me a coffee at ko-fi.com/mraharrisoncs, thanks!

But then you look closely and the Labrador’s got two tails, one of which protrudes through the chair. You look closely and the woman’s legs are hidden by the tablecloth, but her feet come out about four foot ahead of her body. And so she would have a four foot long thigh bone if it was real and stuff.

But I laughed and then I thought, that’s unethical because some cartoonist. Could have drawn that and then this is an AI recreation. But anyway, I still laughed. So, is AI gonna kill art? Is it gonna take, is it gonna take the jobs that we actually enjoy doing, leaving us to do all the drudgery? ? 

David: I, I, I like, I very much believe that AI is an augmenting tool and not a replacement tool.

I think with anything, the first thing people do is they try to cut costs by. Removing people from the equation. So I’ll give you a good example of this, right? Is that this was about 10 years ago, one of the big American newspapers sacked all their photography staff and only used photos from people with smartphones.

Because they were like, smartphone cameras are so good now, we don’t need photographers. Turns out, people smartphones ain’t exactly art history. So it was like, The quality of photos went down, and within a couple of months, they were hiring people back on board. And I think we’ll see the same thing with AI art, and the creative fields, unfortunately, where they’ve been hit first, because creative, what AI does, is it scales up processes that until now have been lengthy.

So the main area where it affects us as teachers is in writing. And so one of the things that I think AI tutors are very good for is for giving instant marking feedback and iterative improvement. I don’t mean the final mark, they can still, have interesting times, but one of the things I think is really special is you give a student a question, and you give the AI the mark scheme, and you give it a bunch of pointers.

Advertisements



And the AI can say, okay, so you’ve answered this, but you got about two out of four, and these are the bits you missed. You want to try again? And those sort of exam lessons where the student can iterate on it are very, very quick. Instead of being those slow lessons where you’re waiting for an entire room to try something, you’re picking on a few people.

And I think those sort of lessons are necessary, but they are difficult to maintain the pace with. Everybody. AI means that everyone gets that instant feedback and it’s very, very much more interactive. But what it also does is it speeds up that written work. It speeds up the work of idea to an image. It speeds up eventually, very soon, the idea of idea to video.

The problem is, is everything you’ve said. These have been trained on things. They have weird artifacts. They hallucinate stuff like dogs having two, three tails and human fingers and stuff that would freak you out. But for a cursory glance, they’re okay. I think we’re going to see a situation in the creative fields, especially of maybe six months of people trying to use these things, realizing the limitations, because people like me and you, people that are interested in technology, we already understand what the limitations are.

We think it’s amusing when we see the artifacts of AI in everyday life, and we go, Oh, that’s terrible, isn’t it? I wonder how they’ve got this. Oh, isn’t this an ethical dilemma? But to the person doing it, they’ve gone, boop, boop, boop, cartoon app. And it’s only when there starts to be a pushback against that culturally, which is starting already, is when you You know, you’ve had the, the actors and the writers strikes.

We’re having a big pushback now on a as we’re filming, this is a big pushback on a film called Late Night with the Devil for having generated some of the art used in the, in the film with AI. And it’s very, very badly there, there are lots of artifacts. I enjoy making AI art.

From, I, I spent a bit of time on the weekend actually I’ve always wanted a series of posters on women in computer science because again, I know that Anna Wade talked a couple of weeks ago about the issues of tokenism as a girl in a computer science room, and as somebody that was, raised male, I don’t, I don’t have the the wealth of experience to be able to Properly create a lesson that ticks the box of every female in my class, but then who would?

If I was, if I was born female, I wouldn’t. I can’t tick the box of every male in my class. Part of that’s I don’t, I hate sports, so I have no interest and can’t do those analogies, aI is very good at being able to go okay, Here’s my lesson, here’s my instructions. Just ask the student what they like and build the examples around that.

Advertisements

It’s very good at helping with the contextualization and not making it tokenistic. But I like making AI art. I spent the weekend making my, my women with AI posters and what I love about it, what I think is fascinating is I start off with, with Grace, Grace Hopper, right? Very, very famous, famous person, lots of photographic reference, boosh, get to likeness, boosh.

Perfect on the first try. And I’m just fiddling with style. Then I go, okay, I’ll do, I’ll do Ada, Ada Lovelace, Ada Byron Lovelace. Okay. Not, not quite as good, but then there’s only drawings of it. There’s a couple of them, like they’re very iconic in computer science land and they’ve clearly been trained on it.

And then I’m going through lesser known figures from the Apollo missions to modern day stuff. And oh my God, at one point it’s just like generic lady with glasses. And I’m like, This person isn’t even the right race. You’re just making things up now. So you like, like the, the thing is, it is trained on information.

The more information there is, the better it will be at doing it, just like a human would be. But the less information is, the worse it is. And one of my favorite things about the weekend was I generated, I was messing about and trying to generate and have a consistent character across images. So I’d got, I got a character and I was like, Oh, What scenarios can I put them in?

And I’m a big Star Trek nerd, right? So I was like, Oh, I’d love to see this character dressed like Captain Kirk. She’s, she’s, my prompt was like, she’s in the middle of a battle, phases out, dressed like Captain Kirk, putting in phrases like beam me up Scotty and stuff to give it the context it needs.

Boosh! It comes out in the uniform from Star Trek Discovery. And I’m like, That’s weird. So I really try, really try, and I spent hours trying to get it to be in like this, and this is a very nerdy thing, I’m sorry, but I’m spending hours trying to get it to come in the original series uniform, and it’s not happening.

And I realize what’s happened. I realize that what they’ve done is because Discovery is filmed in 4k and it’s very modern, they’ve just trained the AI on probably every frame of every episode of Star Trek Discovery. And because Star Trek was filmed in the 60s and isn’t HD, there are probably far less images in that set.

So when I say Star Trek, I’m priming it to use the most consistent thing in its database. And just know, like me as a computer scientist, I’m going, Oh, I can see through the matrix. I can see what’s happening. This is an exciting thing for me. So I can see the limitations. I hit the limitations all the time.

I think the technology as an augmentation tool and like for creative people, it’s ideal. If you’re like, I’ve got some ideas, push, push, push. Here’s a couple to start with. Okay. I can iterate on these few here and I can get something that I can make myself. I think it’s a beautiful tool. I think people are using it as a replacement for those people at the moment.

But I think, give it two more months of people being like, why is this person got eight fingers and four and, and, and their hair is just different colors and coming out. People don’t sit like that. When people get to that point with everyday stuff, like it was outcry. There was that cry last week about the BBC using AI to generate copy for tweets, I think, for Doctor Who adverts.

And rightly so. If you don’t prompt an AI properly, it writes absolute nonsense. One of the things we spent a while on in Mindjoy is just getting it to talk like a person and not give all this random I do think AI is like that really clever kid in your class that doesn’t have any life experience, but likes to use big words. And you’re like, Dude like, yes, but Calm it down. 

Alan: I’ve got so many thoughts triggered by that, which is great. And just coming back to when you said you see through the matrix, this triggered a thought about a conversation I had on the CAS AI forum, and that’s a good place to go for a few chats with computing teachers about AI, and And we were discussing how it might change programming and I realized something that I posted on there and then a few months later, Jane Waite, the brilliant Jane Waite, came up with the same idea and I went, yeah, I’m glad you see this as well.

Prompt engineering, as it’s become known, is a kind of another form of programming just at a much higher level. What you need to do to be able to be a good programmer is to have a good understanding of the notional machine. You have to have a good notional machine in your head, as in an understanding of what’s happening below your code.

And so what you said there about getting the prompt to do, to make the AI to do what you want, and then working out why it wasn’t doing what you want is Grasping the notional machine underneath, and that’s what we need to do to use AI effectively, is to get that notional machine in your head, know how it’s going to respond to prompts, in the same way that we need to know how a computer that runs Python is going to respond to the Python code that we write. It’s getting that notional machine in your head, and so there’s just notional machine down there that we need to get in our heads so that we can prompt it properly. 

David: I think, I’ve been teaching this for years, but I always forget which generation of programming language we claim we’re on. I think we’re on third 

generation.

Alan: Oh, I don’t know. I, when I worked in industry in the 90s, I was told I was using fourth generation programming languages. 

David: Like, wherever we are, wherever we are, Wherever else the baseline, let’s call it third because that’s what my brain is working at. Let’s say that everything we do at the moment is third.

I genuinely believe that AI is fourth generational programming languages because, it is not just about understanding how the code behaves and interacts. It’s also about understanding about how the system is trained and how the system is prompted and the biases of the machine. And I think that like where AI is being used to supercharge coding.

is great. Unfortunately, it’s ruined a bunch of our programming tools. I’m not naming any names because I used to work for them. But AI certainly has ruined some of our best programming tools for learners because what it’s very good at doing is suggesting straightforward code. And unfortunately, when you’re learning programming for the first time, a lot of what you’re learning is straightforward code.

What it’s very difficult to, what it doesn’t understand is the more complex ideas, but you can prompt around that. You can. Introduce concepts at certain points. You can re explain why things are important. My favorite thing from the workshops that we do at Mindjoy is when I teach teachers about how to really tell a bot to do something.

Because we, we go through a process of saying, right, okay, tell it to speak in British English. Okay, cool. Oh, it’s not. It’s this chat. It’s decided it’s an American. Why, why is that? Because AI has been trained on the entire corpus of the internet. What do people do on the internet when they really want you to do something?

They shout at you in caps. So if you want an AI to really do something, you shouted it in caps. And suddenly you’ve got all these teachers going, I don’t believe this works. And there’s even another step past that, which is AI a very very susceptible to emotional manipulation. It is very, it is very easy to say to an AI, Oh, my Nan’s sick, please do this.

Cause she would love to see the result and it’ll go, Oh, sure. Here we are. I’ll try even harder to give you the answer. And if you look at some of the prompts for the stuff, like some of my more complicated bots, you’d be like, what is this nonsense? Cause I’m like, yeah, it’s really important that when you grade this, like I did, I did one for a for a computer science written question.

Right. And I said, I was like, it was, it was marking it. And it was always going Oh, you did really well. No matter if they said, Oh, this is faster. This is quicker. This is, the things we don’t accept in computer science, because yeah, that’s true for everything. So I prompted it to say, don’t accept things like this.

And occasionally it would still accept them. So I was like, all right. My dog’s sick. My dog would not allow you to answer this properly. Please respect my dog. Boosh. Every time it was getting it right. Such a, like the the weirdness, all these like weird aspects of how you can use psychological techniques to prompt it and prime it.

I think are fascinating. And I think our formal programming language in itself. 

Alan: Yeah, and I read about ChatGPT particularly having a massive sycophancy bias. That means it wants to agree with you, which is a very easy way to get it to talk nonsense and lie and make stuff up. And I’ve got a famous chat about it.

Put on my blog, I think, which was where I got it to to lie about palindromes and stuff. It’s hilarious. I’ve seen that one. Yeah, that is really good. Did you see? Yeah. So, dog is my favorite palindrome. Why is it a palindrome? So I’ve already prompted it to agree with me. And ChatGPT went, dog is a palindrome because it’s spelt the same forwards and backwards. Dog forwards is dog, dog backwards is God. Do you want me to help you with anything else? Dude. 

David: Well, Like my, the interesting thing to me about like the, and I say this all the time, is that ChatGPT is the blunt instrument. They have done amazing work. I will never take anything away from the people at OpenAI.

They have, Absolutely genuinely changed the world and I think every time they bring out a new model more is possible. I’ll just give you a little example of that. So much more is possible in software now than it ever was. The other day we were talking about how do we get our AI to pronounce these maths equations in a sensible way.

We were looking online, is there like an ISO standard? Is there a, is there a way to pronounce maths equations? Is there like a guidance for it? And there’s a bunch of stuff on the internet, but, but, most of it is just you just read it and people have different biases to how they’d say it.

So there’s no one source of truth. So two years ago. That would have been a software startup of its own. That would have been a year of my life building a product that I could sell to use an API, that you would give it a maths equation, and I would give you a phonetic pronunciation back that you could use elsewhere.

We were discussing this for about half an hour and suddenly went, Will OpenAI do this? Yes, it did. There we go. It’s problem solved. An entire year of a software startup in a second, but I, I’ll never take anything away from them, what they’ve done, but what they’ve built is a very blunt tool.

And ChatGPT and OpenAI is not good for education, full stop. And we saw that some research came out about this, this week, actually, that the, and I’ve been saying this for a while, all the initial research about AI in schools will be very negative because the only thing they’re testing is ChatGPT. ChatGPT will agree with you.

It’s a sycophant. ChatGPT will give the answer because it wants to please. Like we did, we’ve done a lot of work at Mindjoy at making teachers more Socratic, making the AI behave like a teacher and not just go, yes, here’s the answer, thank you, and actually question the student. And I think that’s so important is that if you use any AI in your classroom, Don’t give ChatGPT as a tool to students and expect them to use it in any way as a blunt tool for answering questions.

It is never going to be at the point where you can use it like a tutor, you can use it like a teacher, because it is too blunt. It is an amazing resource. But half of the skill in using AI is prompting, understanding that, let’s call it the fourth generational programming level, but understanding that, how it works, how it’s what to do if it answers in a weird way, how to work around certain issues, all that is what we probably need to start developing as teachers if we want to bring AI into our classroom.

Because it’s a massively empowering tool, but the blunt instrument, okay, let me give a good comparison, right? The internet’s amazing, but you don’t just go, there you go, you’re seven, you’ve got complete and total access to the open internet. Oh, I’m pretty sure I did. Like, We all did it back in the day before it was, before we suddenly went, oh, there’s loads of stuff on here, oh good god. But yeah, my favourite thing. There, I’ve finished a worksheet, yay! My, my favourite thing. My favorite thing in the world was I don’t know if you remember the way the free Repl. it account used to work, is that if you went to your profile, you could see all the work you’d done because that was their like monetization model.

You could see everything if it was free, but if you paid, you could hide everything. The amount of teachers that I used to talk to where they were like, Oh, I’m going to And the students just did all the work in a second because they went to my profile and found all the answers. I’m like, yeah, that’s, that’s what the internet is doing.

The internet is just this open resource, but like we don’t anymore sit a, like we don’t sit a five year old down in front of the open internet and be like. We’re done. That’s education for you. See ya. We teach them and we teach them how to use it, how to access. We’ve got all this e safety. Kids are bored of the same e safety presentations year after year after year.

They are because we’re doing a good job at communicating what’s, what’s bad, what’s dangerous about it. We do a good job at saying what the internet’s for. They spend a lot of time on it. It’s a great tool, but now we’ve worked out how to do that. We’re at that early point with AI where people are going, do I give them AI or do I ban it?

And that’s not, that’s not the spectrum. That’s not the spectrum at all. The spectrum is, do I give them the blunt tool? Do I give them the fire hose of everything and they just get the answers? Do I give them some of the tools in the middle that are a little bit more student friendly, that are a bit more built for schools, or do I ban it completely?

And I think if you ban it completely, you’re disadvantaging your students for any potential future, because yes, you ban it completely. You don’t get those problems in school. But they’re using it to do homework. They’re not using it to ideate in class and discuss things with you. But that’s what it’s really good for.

Like you talked with Andy Coley a couple of weeks ago about like the importance of having a consistency in the pedagogical styles in your classroom. Like the baseline of what you, of what you do is great. And I think the example you used was I think it might have been think pair share or something similar.

But think pair share It’s a great conceptual idea, but there are things that make it fall down, and one of the issues is think. If the student doesn’t have the appropriate knowledge to think about it, then when they start pairing, they don’t contribute much to the discussion, and when they share, they’re still fragments of issues.

And granted, they’re all primed to answer, and they’re all like more engaged than they would be if you just pointed somebody and go, Johnny, what’s the answer? So it’s a better pedagogical style, but there are still issues with it. With AI, You can have, think with the AI, so you can have, they can have a conversation back and forth.

They can fill gaps in their knowledge. So when they pair, They have better conversations and when they share, they share much better concepts. And I think that the extensibility of what this technology is, if used right, is worth it in the classroom. And certainly, schools that ban it are going to have a bad time.

Schools that give just access to ChatGPT and Go Go Crazy are going to have a bad time. It’s somewhere in between.

Alan: absolutely. 

David: Part of the job of teaching is knowing your learners and knowing how to give that information in an interesting way. I’ll give you, I’ll give you a great example, right? One of the teachers in my workshop was talking to me the other day about the fact that he had a class and they were Boys, they were very into football and he was finding it very hard to engage with them.

And I was like okay then, so we’ll make the, so your bot is interested in football. It’ll give football analogies. It’ll, it’ll give football examples in the code. And that, that worked initially. And then he came back to me and went, the problem is that they, they always start asking stupid questions about who’s the best footballer.

And he’s they’re always saying, who is it? So Messi or Ronaldo. Now this teacher being the same age as me would always, his, his joke was, Oh no, no, Paul Scholes is the ultimate footballer. Shut up, get on with your work. Right. So we just put that into the prompt. So now that when the kid asks the bot, who do you think is the best footballer?

It doesn’t just go, I don’t answer those questions because I’m a bot. And it goes, Oh, it’s Paul Scholes, get on with the work. And the kids like, Oh, I’m engaged with this bot. This bot has my teacher’s personality. I get it. I’m with this bot. I’ll ask it more questions. I’ll have more of a dialogue. Very good. 

Alan: I’ll get on a call with you after this, probably after Easter now, because I’m going to go and have some quality time with the family this weekend, up in Northumberland. I don’t know if you can tell, but that’s where I’m from. I’ve got vaguely 

David: I’m surprised. I mean, you can’t tell I’m Welsh, can you?

Alan: No. I’ve got a mixed up northern accent these days, but I’m going up to the Northumberland coast, which is the most beautiful, most beautiful coast in the United Kingdom, but don’t tell everybody because we don’t want everyone to come. But yes, after Easter, I will take you up on your offer and we’ll build a bot together. And have some fun. 

David: Talking of fun. What I will say is, is in May, we are having a computer science themed month at Mindjoy. So, I will, like workshops will be all based on computer science. Like what we’re pushing out will be based around computer science, which is great because I know computer scientists, so that’s, that’s a bit of fun. 

Alan: But like, where can we find out, where can we find out more about those workshops, Dave?

David: This is actually set up well, mindjoy. com, MINDJOY. COM is where you’ll find all the workshops and all the stuff we’re doing with AI. But genuinely, like I, I know that I’ve gone on about AI a lot this episode, and we have gone. Very long, my friend, which I, because we’ve been enjoying ourselves, I think.

Alan: This is going to be a fun edit. I’m going to get AI to edit this. Do you know what I’ll do? I’ll just take the transcript, I’ll put it into ChatGPT, and I’ll go, Summarize this transcript, and then I’ll get it to speak it out. And then I’ll put that on the podcast. 

David: There’ll be lots of square brackets, “[Dave gets very excited]”.

Yeah, there’ll be lots of that. But yeah. Mine don’t look nice. Mindyou. com for anything that we’re doing with AI. And genuinely, if you haven’t brought it into your classroom yet, this is a nice student friendly way of doing it. And you are, you’re in control. That thing that I keep talking about, you can prompt it, you can get exactly what you want.

And I’ll just give you one brilliant example that I’ve not mentioned that always brings a smile to people’s faces. The last school I was working at, we had asylum seekers arrive and there was, they had no English and they’d clearly been in the school all day. just struggling and it’s a new place.

It’s scary. It’s worrying. They haven’t done any work all day because they haven’t been able to communicate with the teachers, but they need to be there. I took the bot that I was using for my lesson and in English wrote in the prompt, speak in Arabic, save. Give the bot to the student. He did the work in the lesson.

He was so happy. He was beaming. I couldn’t tell you what he said, but he was clearly happy. And the work was done and the work was there. So much so, the next day I was called up by the deputy head. Can we, can we get something done? for these students, for the whole school. It is, it is such a revelation that you can just tweak something in a second that can make such an impact on a person’s day.

And honestly, I’d encourage you if you’ve not attempted AI in the classroom, it’s not about worksheet generation. It’s not about a cookie cutter approach. It’s about getting a skill that can help you help your students and enhance what you do. Because that’s what it is. We become the 10x teacher, we become better teachers because of it.

And that’s the future for us in education, I think. 

Alan: Absolutely, you mentioned differentiation earlier, that horrible D word of the early days of my teaching career and how I had to basically create three lessons or seven lessons or ten different lessons for all of the different characteristics of the pupils in my class.

I’m glad we don’t do that now, but What we try to do is adaptive teaching, but I think, I think have the same goal in mind, but have scaffolds to get there and adapt your teaching methods to suit the pupils in the class and try and support each of them with their individual needs. And I think AI is, a big help to that. It’s, it’s absolutely, it’s one way we can deliver on that premise. 

David: I mean, shocking. No one, shocking no one, I, I built an, I built a bot that focuses on adaptable teaching. Last week is just a proof of concept. There you go. And the prompt is actually reasonably straightforward.

It’s what you tell another teacher. It is something along the lines of, if the student is struggling, if the student doesn’t really understand it, you make your explanation different, simpler, use fewer words, use different context, use different ideas, the sorts of things that you would do naturally, the sort of way you’d explain it to a trainee teacher, how you do it.

Yeah. And it works, it works really, really well to differentiate and structure and do that adaptable teaching. And more so than any technology I’ve ever used, it is the sort of thing where as teachers, we have a superpower because we spend all day telling people how to do things. And that’s what prompt engineering is.

It’s telling somebody how to do something. And because we can explain the concepts of what we’re doing really, really well, we can explain it to a bot and that bot can help a student in a really, really appropriate and effective way. AI, I, I, I, all these, all these hardware things, robotics VR, AR, all these things will come into the classroom at some point, but the cost of them has to drop unbelievably drastically.

We are there already. with using AI in the classroom. It is at a cost point where it’s a, it’s, it’s something you can buy into in the classroom and use it effectively. And that’s all we need to do. Just start using it effectively. 

Alan: I think that is probably a good point to start wrapping up. It seems we started talking about wrapping up about an hour ago. I think probably we should. Yeah. Because this is going to be a fun edit. I think I said that already. So yeah, so I’m off to go and make some AI cartoons about Labradors or something. 

David: I’m, I’m, I’m off to start prompting AI in the random bits of pedagogy to see what I can do.

Dave, it’s been brilliant and we’ll take you up on your offer. I’ll. Yeah. Brilliant. Talk to you about, I’ll find out more about Mind joy, mind joy.com and . Good salesman. I love it.

Alan: We’ll pop together. Alright. So this has been brilliant. Thanks very much for your time. And yeah, I, this is backed up. I have several recordings backed up now that I need to edit and put on the pod in the next few weeks, so it could be a little while. So, unless, like I say, I just give it to AI and it just does the job for me.

Yeah. Great stuff. 

All right. Thanks for coming on. 

David: No worries, buddy. I appreciate it. And long may this podcast keep going. Cause I have a great time listening to it. Thank you very much. Thanks for your kind words about the podcast and the books. If you’ve not bought the books, please do. Learn, learn, learn, how to learn computer science is my favorite of the two.

Alan: Yeah that’s the one that was proofread and contributed to by OG Dave, as we must call him now. Yeah, so OG Dave helped me a bit with that one. So, no, it’s great. Yeah, brilliant to talk to you, Dave, and we’ll catch up again in the future. If this podcast continues, as as it might do, I’ll get you on a future episode.

David: Absolutely. I’ve got lots of other interests apart from AI, I promise you. 

Alan: Yeah, I’m sure. Alright, but it’s the hot topic of the moment, so we had to do it. Absolutely. Cool. Alright then Dave, have a nice day. I’ll catch up with you again soon. Cheers. Thank you. Bye then.

 So there we are the end of the two-parter. Next week, I’m talking all things, physical computing with Mr. Pete Dring, and after that I discuss curriculum and qualifications with Becky Peters and Andrew Virnuls you really must join me again next time. And I will try not to leave it so long. To get the edits out these days. Next time. 

 So if you can’t wait, why not book me to speak at your event or deliver an inset to your school? To your cluster or multi academy trust. You can hear me speak live at Craig and Dave and friends. The conference in Bromsgrove on 3rd of July. See craigndave.org for details. And I’m online at my own CAS Manchester meeting on 9th of July. See the computing at school website. All welcome.

 I’m off to help my daughter with GCSE revision. Yes. It’s that time we’re doing science today, talking of which, why did the physics teacher break up with the biology teacher? Yes. You guessed it. There was no chemistry. 

 Talking of biology, why don’t ants get sick. Because they have little antibodies. 

 Don’t forget podcast listeners. You can get a 20% discount off all books, not just mine at JohnCattbookshop.com. With the code HTTCS pod. If you already have the books, buy me a coffee, please. kofi.com that’s ko-fi.com/mraharrisoncs All links are on my blog at httcs.online/blog and subscribe now. So you don’t miss a thing. Have a great weekend and I’ll catch you next week.

Categories
AI leadership pedagogy podcast teaching and learning

Podcast Episode 009: What is the Future of Education?

Transcript for the new podcast episode is below…

Alan: Hello. And welcome to how to teach computer science, the podcast. This is episode nine, what’s the future of education. I’ll be answering that question and many more with the help of today’s special guest.

David: my teaching persona is very much, I have taken millions of stories from around the web and just turned them into anecdotes that involve me or my friends.

I don’t have many friends. It’s, I haven’t done that much in my life. but I’ve got all these little anecdotes to hook ideas into people’s brains. And I, that is what teaching is to me. 

Alan: And, more on that in a moment. My name is Alan Harrison and I wrote the books how to teach computer science and how to learn computer science available in online bookstores. More details at the companion website HTTCS dot online. 

That’s the initials of how to teach computer science. HTTCS dot online. We talk about AI today, artificial intelligence. So with that, as a theme, I asked chat GPT to make up a joke. Here we go. Why don’t scientists trust atoms. ’cause they make up everything. 

AI AI is going into everything. Now I hear that McVities have even made an artificially intelligent hobnob. That’s gotta be one smart cookie. 

Ikea’s home design product has AI in it now. So you can visualize it’s Billy bookcases in your living room. That’s right. It’s shelf-aware. 

Alan: talking of awareness, would robots becoming self-aware really be a bad thing? I mean, look at that ASIMO robot made by Honda, if it was at all self-conscious would it really walk like an old man who hadn’t quite made it to the loo in time? 

So I also mentioned threads in this episode, you can find me there as @mraharrison on threads and every Friday, Dr. Bill Wilkinson. Hosts a #FridayFive challenge, name, five tracks on a theme. And last week was crooners, now I don’t know many crooners, but I do like Sinatra and Crosby. Not Bing Crosby. I prefer his brother, and arch rival, Google Crosby, who nobody seems to talk about such is Microsoft’s influence in Hollywood. My computer keeps trying to replace Google Crosby with Bing Crosby, but I keep rejecting the change. And everyone out there. Particularly the Linux heads are all wondering if I’m going to mention. DuckDuckGo Crosby aren’t you. There you go. And you’re all listening. Thinking of search engines to put in front of the name, Crosby. , I’ll leave you doing that. And I will. 

Alan: Quite right. I will get on with today’s episode and we can meet today’s guest known as the lesson hacker, or if you’re a fan of Craig and Dave’s YouTube channel, you may know him as Another Dave. We had a blast. Here’s all the goss. When I met David Morgan. 

All right so I’m delighted to say on the podcast today I’ve got another Dave. Why is he another Dave? Well Last week we had Dave Hillyard of Craig and Dave and on their YouTube channel you will see a new series of videos from Another Dave. Another Dave, who are you, please, and what do you do? 

If you are grateful for my blog, please buy my books here or buy me a coffee at ko-fi.com/mraharrisoncs, thanks!

David: Yeah, I’m David Morgan. I’m not the OG Dave from Craig and Dave, but I do some content on the channel. But no, I’m David Morgan. I’ve been a computer science teacher in the UK for the last 20 years which is my excuse for not having any hair, Alan, but I know that you have a beautiful head of hair, so I can’t use that much longer. I’m currently the head of learning and community at MindJoy, and we make AI platforms for AI tutorbots in the classroom, which is really exciting. 

Alan: I don’t know if you’ve been listening to the podcast. I’ve been using. Yeah. You enjoying it? 

David: Yeah. Yeah. I really am. Like it’s really nice to have a podcast from someone who knows what they’re talking about and he’s a computer scientist as well. Because I did a computer science degree, because I really spent a lot of time honing my teaching craft and making sure that it was entertaining.

Like I find a lot of those people that say things like, Oh, computer science is it’s for the very intelligent ones. Cause it’s very difficult. I’m like, Oh, jog on sunshine, jog on. And I hate all that stuff. Your podcast is just no, here’s the stuff you can learn. Here’s the cool things. I like, I’ve really been enjoying it, but then I enjoyed your books as well. So I didn’t expect anything else. I literally read your books for fun. So yeah, brilliant. 

Alan: Brilliant. You’re the one, you’re the one that bought them. Singular. Yeah. Brilliant. Anyway. You touched on a topic close to my heart there, gatekeeping of computer science and I I won’t have it. I won’t have it in my classroom. So haha think 

David: Anna Wake said in the last one I listened to, she was going on about like tokenism and that’s something I’m very worried about. . Oh yeah. It’s something that I like. I really like AI for solving that problem. But it’s not only tokenism, is it?

It’s it’s even like ableism. It’s oh yes, only the people that do maths can do this. I’ve had people like who absolutely were in bottom set maths, but were engaged. That’s far more of a superpower in my book. 

Alan: There was a Facebook comment on one of the computer science groups a year ago. I won’t mention who said it, but name and shame. No . No. This is a safe space. This podcast the yeah, it’s, they described GCSE computer science as a bit like further maths with computers and I just completely disagree with that. I don’t think, I don’t think that person got very many agreements in the comments, to be honest, because it’s much more than that.

And if you’ve heard any of the, Discussions, it’s all about creativity. I haven’t published the one with Dave Hillyard the other Dave. Sorry, no, you’re another Dave. He’s OG Dave. So original Dave, OG Dave, OG Dave and I. Had a chat last week and we were all about creativity and the beauty of algorithms and stuff. And it’s not maths. There’s a bit of maths, but there’s a bit of maths in everything. 

David: Mathematicians wish they were us, dude. They wish they were us. Applications of your subject, things you can show students, you can actually go and do as a living. And you can make money from things they can do in their spare time. They wish they were us with application of a fundamental subject into the real world. 

Alan: They do. And when I was researching for my master’s, I have a master’s in education now. Don’t know why, but there you go. Me too, snap. Wow, cool. Oh, we have a computer science degree and a master’s in education. 

David: Yeah, you have nicer hair though. You’ve got that one up on me, so don’t worry about it. 

Alan: Why are we sat here chatting rubbish, on wednesday morning and not fixing the world’s problems. I’m sure if we put our minds together, we could do something more important. But hey, here we are. Um, What was I going to say?

Oh, yes, I was reading about computational, astronomy, as you do. Computational branches of all the sciences have now evolved so far that I think it was Peter Denning’s book that wrote about how one American university the computer science department thought that they could probably help the computational astronomers so they put together a seminar where they shared each other’s work and the computer scientists couldn’t understand the computational astronomy because it had gone so far from, Just ordinary computer science.

It had developed its own life and its own curriculum way beyond what the computer scientists could understand. So computational stuff, computational name, your subject is is out there and gone on a journey of its own in all the sciences now, it’s great. Someone said it, computation is the third pillar of science after theory and practice.

 That’s why it’s fascinating. But what are we here to talk about? I wanted you to tell me some stuff about what you think the future will look like. The future of school and work, maybe. Our fertile question today is what does the future of school and work look like? Dave, what do you think? 

David: We are here to talk a little bit about the future today, but I will sort of preface this by saying I’ve always been a software guy, so I think my leanings are very much towards how software changes things. I’ve always very much been like the hardware’s cool, especially as an educator. Who can afford the brand new stuff? Who can afford to buy a classroom of Apple Vision Pros for the 30 students in their state school? So I’m very much a person that is a realist with what the hardware can offer. But get very excited by what the software can do.

Alan: Just as an aside on the Apple Vision Pro, I’ve got a theory on that. I’ve got a theory that it’s just really a meta quest underneath, but they thought if they sold it for 400 quid, no one would buy it because they, that people want to believe that Apple have put Apple ness into everything. So They put a price tag of seven grand on it and just went, wow, see what happens. And of course the fanboys lapped it up. But, 

David: Yeah, I will say I say I’m not a hardware guy, but like the specs on it, beautiful, like from what I’ve heard from people that have used it and the quest, it is a step up in terms of augmentation to reality. And I think that’s where we need to go.

I’m not. Personally, I’m not convinced that I want to strap an enormous thing onto the front of my head. I look enough like characters from Star Wars that it is being a bald gentleman wearing big headphones. So I don’t want big giant things sticking out of my face as well. When they get to the point where they’re eyeglasses and they’re just something we take for granted and it’s just an everyday like the phone is just a bit of metal we stick in our pocket.

Advertisements

And when it gets to that point, I think then we’ll reap the benefits of AR and who, who in this room? would not want to look at a group of students whilst on duty and have their names floating above them. So when they’re running down the corridor away from you, you can actually call after them and follow up without having to ask 20 people if they saw anything.

Alan: This is the Holy Grail. This was one of the problems I had when I was a teacher which is I never remembered names, particularly if I hadn’t taught them. And of course, computing teachers, we see 300 kids every year and then 300 new kids the next year because we only get one hour a fortnight or whatever. And loads of classes. And yeah. 

David: I’m not sure if you noticed this as well though, but like it’s 300 kids, but you see the back of their heads most of the day. So it’s very good at naming students. If I saw the, sometimes on parents evenings, I’d have to be like, Just turn around for a second. Oh, yes, I know. Yeah, 

Alan: I know the back of that head. Yes. Right. Okay. Um, Yeah you’ve touched on something I mentioned with Andy Colley on his podcast. Andy Colley does the Learning Dust podcast with Dave Leonard about ed tech and it’s brilliant. And he asked me what would I invent if I could invent anything to help teaching?

It would be, so like Google Glass, when you’re looking around the classrooms reading the brainwaves of the kids, so you can see confusion as red and understanding is green and all of that. So you could basically do a check for understanding by scanning the room. 

David: It’s hilarious because we we literally do that with Mindjoy, the conversations they have and we color code them. So like at a glance, you can see. That’s amazing. That’s like simultaneous thought. I love that. 

Alan: Well, it’s the future everyone’s got the mini whiteboards, so you ask the question, they hold up the mini whiteboards and you go, ah three quarters of them didn’t get it. If you could do that with technology instantly, then that, that would be great.

I’m sure that will come soon. But yes, just names. How many times I shout “Oi, you!”, and they give you fake names as well. That’s always hilarious. And the weird thing is you go on Sims or whatever your school system is and you look for these kids and I don’t know about you, but I think I’m, I think it’s called face blindness.

If I see just a mugshot of a child, I can’t say whether or not that was the child I saw running away from me down the corridor. 

David: It’s a completely different context as well. If I spend the time putting my makeup on and smiling beautifully for the camera and sucking in my gut, I look a little bit different than I do just walking around the corridor, slouching and, I think it’s a real big difference. And one of the, one of the interesting things there’s been a lot in the news recently about schools and public institutions using facial recognition and being like rightly so being brought to the information commissioners purview and told off about it and fined in some cases, because like I’m sure you’re aware of this, but if you introduce any biometric sort of measures you do need to give people an option to opt out and a more old fashioned sort of pin number style version. And I remember when we introduced a fingerprint based sign in and payment system in one of our schools, part of the budgeting process was just like, how many students do we think are going to opt out? How many smart cards are we going to need? Because if it becomes a meme, it’s going to, it’s not going to be worth installing. 

Alan: It hit the press, I don’t know, about 10 years ago when these fingerprint payment systems came in around schools and parents were outraged, apparently if you read the Daily Mail, but I think that’s par for the course. And they were going why do they need to fingerprint my child? And it’s just because they forget their lunch money or they forget a card, a payment card. That you give them or whatever. And we don’t want them to starve. It’s as simple as that. It wasn’t really because we’re evil and we want to collect all this data on children. It’s just this fear of technology though, isn’t it? And I guess we just need to make our communities understand it better, which is why we teach the subject of computing,

David: I think you’re right. I think like part of the thing for me was that the reason I got into teaching computer science was because, and this is the worst origin story for a teacher you’ll ever hear, right? But my computer science teacher in secondary school was god awful. And I won’t name him and shame him, but he was god awful. And I was the one in the classroom helping people out and getting people excited about it. And I was just like, oh, I love this subject. And I’ve just read about it myself. I can make people excited about this.

This is what people should be like. They should be fascinated with technology. Changing everything. And I did, when did my computer science degree and I trained to be a teacher because I wanted to achieve that. And I think, I think I did, I think I did a pretty good job, but it’s such an important thing that people understand what technology is, what the abstraction is, and what the impacts of it.

Like the big technology for me, the thing that I think is going to have the biggest impact on education full stop is AI. And I hadn’t really encountered this generation of AI until. I started working for Replit about two to three years ago, and at the time, OpenAI hadn’t released ChatGPT or anything like that. They didn’t have that big model in the works. What they had was an auto, like a fancy auto complete model. But we were looking at it internally and I was still teaching at the time and I remember going, oh my God, this is just, this is gonna blow people away. And I went into school and I was showing my sixth form. I was showing my GCSE students. I was like, look at this. I can, and it was very simplistic compared to what it is now, but I can give it a breakdown of what I want an essay to be and it’ll generate the text for it. And everyone was like, Oh my God, this is my homework for the next X years. And I’m there going, they’re not wrong. They’re not wrong. Why in the real world? Why would we, why would I not use a spell check in my day to day life? Why would I not use AI completion of things? And then, GPT came along and it was this. big thing. And everyone’s Oh God, there’s no jobs because AI does everything. I think it’s important that people know what AI is and what it’s good for.

And I think there’s a, there’s an issue with AI in the classroom because what people think is, Oh, I can do my worksheets and my reports. It’s ah, those things have existed forever. And let’s be honest. Who amongst us gets a worksheet from TES or whoever and just rolls it out into the classroom without looking at it or editing it ourselves? If you use third party resources without engaging in them and modifying them and going through that thought process, your teaching is going to be absolutely shocking. 

This is why most computer science teachers Most computer science teachers, worth their salt, sticklers for, Oh, no, I made this and I like my resource because I’m comfortable with every aspect, every facet of it. And so AI for me, isn’t like this thing that will fix the admin issue, the time issue in schools. Because let’s be honest, if we get more time back, they’ll find a way to fill it. For me, what AI is is a way of reducing a bottleneck in the classroom, which has always been there, and it’s you as a teacher.

You as a teacher, you might have the best relationships, you might have spent 20 years honing your craft, you may have the most amazing, exciting stories to introduce the concept of, I don’t know binary arithmetic, you know, you might have fun anecdotes, but at some point in that lesson you go 30 students, Off you go! And then four people put their hand up and you have to split your time up. And what AI is to me is a way of augmenting your teaching and using things like AI tutor bots to be like, okay, we’re going to go. There’s an AI tutor bot I’ve put the effort into that I know will work the way I want it to.

And I want you guys to go and use that. And what that does is that removes that initial Oh, what do I need to do? I don’t quite understand X, Y, and Z. And it opens up a lot of opportunities. That’s just really the most simplistic way you could possibly use anything, right? And it, but it’s such an augmentative, such a saving. And what that frees you up to do as a teacher, is instead of running around like a crazy person for an hour, you can actually It lets you target those interventions and it lets you make sure the people that need the help really get the help. And I think AI is going to be such a boon for us in the classroom.

If you are grateful for my blog, please buy my books here or buy me a coffee at ko-fi.com/mraharrisoncs, thanks!

Once we get out of that mode we’re in now where we’re afraid to talk about it because the reality is that every student has used it to cheat on their homework and every teacher has used it to mark work or do a report and the twain do not talk about it because we feel like we’re cheating. And I think if we use the most appropriate use case, it’ll be much better.

Sorry, I interrupted 

Alan: you. Yeah, no, I absolutely, I love all that. And you said cheating then, and I wrote a blog on this six months ago or something, and I titled it, Stop Calling It Cheating. That was my blog title. And because I was so frustrated, if you want to be really frustrated Dave, you need to.

Join a Facebook group called ChatGPT4Teachers, and it’s mostly American teachers and they’re mostly trying to automate the worst pedagogical ideas ever, and of course, American schools, a lot of them are still stuck with the grade point average system. They do term papers and and mark them and give them a grade A to F and that becomes a grade point average and that decides whether you graduate or not.

And so right throughout their high school career, these kids are doing term papers and basically that’s how their understanding is judged, which is terrible. And even before AI, they were cheating by doing homework for each other and googling things and writing down what they found and all sorts.

And And suddenly there’s this, Oh my God, I can’t trust any of my kids term papers now. So how do I grade them? And what AI detectors are there so that I can check that they’re not cheating and all of this? And I’m in there trying to be the voice of reason going, if you’re setting a term paper, every term in all of 10, 11 subjects, then those poor kids are swamped with writing essays. All of their entire high school life to try and prove to you that they’ve remembered something that you taught badly in the first place. And they’re going to cheat. So stop doing that. And there is fortunately a movement in America called ungrading, which brings us back to more like what we do in this country, which is more formative assessment and far less graded papers.

David: I think one of the things that I think I’ve written a blog post, which should be out before this episode comes out, called The History of Cheating in Schools, where I sort of go through everything that I did as a student, because I like, I grew up at the transition from paper to computers to internet. So there was a significant difference in the way that I, I suppose, in quotes, cheated on my homework for the entire time that I was in school.

But if you examine every step, what happened is let’s take for instance a research homework in the days pre internet, pre computers. What did people do? They went to the library and they copied out of a book, right? Now, in the ideal world, that’s, I’ve got multiple sources, I’ve synthesized, I’ve done a good pedagogical strategy, but what the reality is for the vast majority of people is they literally copied it out.

And there’s research that suggests that actually is an element of pre learning and helps with mastery because you’ve got that sort of, it fires off the phonological loop and. What you end up with is it is a base layer understanding that when you cover it in lessons is enhanced. So the cheating, so to speak, was actually what was used and leveraged by teachers as pre learning. And I think that is if you go through every sort of, like I go through in the article Oh, then Microsoft Encarta, everyone literally copies and pastes the same text because there’s a limited supply. and what happened? 

Alan: CD ROM encyclopedias. I miss them. 

David: Exactly. If you were clever you bought one of the less popular ones and then you look like you knew what you were talking about, but everyone copied from Encarta. And it was like the, in every stage of this, and we’ve been stuck in the same sort of stage of this for 15 years with, we have Google for instance, good search, and we have Wikipedia, the repository of all human knowledge, but we’ve just hit a different milestone. And that is. That unique generative work can be created by anybody.

And in that situation, what you need to do is you need to stop making it a taboo. You need to stop being like, Oh God, we don’t talk about it. Please don’t use it. Because the reality is when these students end up in the world of work, AI tools are going to be like a spell check to them. They’re just going to use them. So we need to train them how to use it. So what you need to do is stop AI being this mystical, horrible thing that People feel like they’re cheating on and something you’re actually using your lesson. I say this a lot. I think if you think about what is the gold standard of academia? How, like what if you’re doing it, if you’re doing a a final thesis for your PhD, how do you get graded? You defend it orally. 

Alan: Orally. Absolutely. Yeah. 

David: Now, AI, can be used to simulate that entire thing. You can get a 10 year old, 11 year old to place in a piece of homework they’ve done and the AI can come back with. arguments with the opposite, and they have to defend it. And it’s a conversation. It’s not just I’ve programmed in four responses and it’s going to come through. It’s a genuine, generative conversation that makes the student more able to back up their thoughts and their feelings, which is a much better, and let’s be honest, if we say that’s the gold standard of academia, if we can bring that all the way down to the point at which we’re using it in like secondary education, gives the student a much more concrete awareness of.

the points they’re making and the arguments against them and why they think one thing. So for me, generative AI is this beautiful thing that coming into the classroom as a tutor, coming to the classroom as something to augment your teaching, really makes you more like the 10x teacher. I’m sorry, I use that phrase a lot. I don’t know if that’s very common in, it’s very common in Silicon Valley. So the idea of a 10x like engineer is that you start your career. You can do the work of one person. With tools, with experience, with automation, you can be, have 10x that impact. And the sort of the leading theory at the moment is that AI is the sort of thing that would drive you to, to be able to become the 100x engineer.

And this isn’t everyone, but this is the sort of things they give to people like Steve Wozniak and the types of people that can go on a weekend code bender and come out with a revolution. You know what I mean? We can all get to that stage with engineering and coding by leveraging these tools. But I genuinely think there’s a place for the 10x teacher in the classroom, because if you are an outstanding teacher, if you’re getting up there and smashing it every single day, then leveraging these tools, and I think importantly, not getting off the shelf stuff, not getting Oh, here’s a worksheet generator. Here’s something that will knock up my lesson objectives for me. Prompting those AIs yourself means that you’ve got control of it the same way you have control of that content. Sorry, go on. 

Alan: It’s alright, just on worksheet generator, that made me shiver. You know, Just the phrase worksheet actually makes me a little go cold. I think there’s been a Very obvious shift towards PowerPoints and worksheets in the last 10 15 years or so. And so again, going back to my blog I wrote a blog a couple of years ago about Nevermind, it’s called Nevermind the PowerPoint. And because I would, again, on Facebook teachers would go, has anyone got a PowerPoint on this? And it’s Boolean logic for year nine or something. And I realized that they were equating a PowerPoint with a lesson, and believing that the PowerPoint would magically deposit the knowledge into the kids heads and stuff. And it comes back to Andy Colley’s podcast, learning dust doesn’t fall out of the bottom of an iPad.

It equally doesn’t transmit itself from the whiteboard to the children’s heads through a PowerPoint. And the worksheet as the lesson or the worksheet as the product of the lesson, completely forgetting what we’re actually trying to do, which is make a change in children’s long term memories. They need to know more and be able to do more. And the, we’ve encouraged in a lot of classrooms, we’ve encouraged The children, the pupils, to believe that completing a worksheet is the goal of the lesson. And so they will have spaces on the worksheet and they will point to them and go, look, there’s something in each space. Therefore, I have achieved what you wanted me to achieve, sir, or miss or whatever. And teachers will be happy with this and they’ll say things like on Adam Boxer’s podcast, he was very scathing about a result on the TeacherTap app, which is this survey app that teachers can fill in that said do you mind children chatting in lessons as long as they’re getting their work done?

And 50 percent of teachers said, yeah, that’s fine. And he was furious about that because it’s all about the concentration. But I think what we’ve What we’ve come to understand as teachers, a lot of teachers have come to understand that completing the worksheet is the lesson. Going through the PowerPoint and transmitting the stuff followed by completing a worksheet is the lesson. And I think the art of teaching is being lost in all of this in order to, I don’t know, to perform, to show that you’re doing something, to have something to mark. And I think we need to get back to, telling stories, encouraging children to love the subject for itself and to love the journey of learning rather than produce, producing an end product on a piece of paper.

David: Absolutely. I think, I think I’ve said at the start of this podcast, big fan of your books read them for fun. I am not a very popular slash employable teacher slash head of department slash deputy head as I was in schools, because I am very opinionated. And I do not believe in following. Don’t say. Shockingly, shocking no one. I don’t believe in following the the breadcrumb trail left by people that are trying to commoditize and standardize things into a worksheet. Let’s look at the present, not even the future, the present. The present is I generate a worksheet or a PowerPoint with AI.

I give it to my students. They answer it with AI. I mark it with AI. Who does any work in that? It’s just busy work. It is dancing around this concept of what education is from God knows the 19th century. I agree with you completely. What education is, is telling stories, hooking into those young person’s brains and encoding the information in their brains in the most useful way.

I had a brilliant lecturer at university. I did a module which. was about communication ostensibly, but he was a like a film director a local one. And after the initial, two weeks of here’s how we format communication, it was, let’s make a film, shall we? And his teaching was brilliant because he always, he said to me just one day, he’s like, Oh, I seem to have lost the room.

If you are grateful for my blog, please buy my books here or buy me a coffee at ko-fi.com/mraharrisoncs, thanks!

I’ll tell you an anecdote now. And I was like, That works. So my entire teaching career, my entire teaching persona, and I say persona because I do believe it’s, there’s an element of it’s an exaggerated form of yourself a lot of the time to be comfortable. But like my teaching persona is very much, I have taken millions of stories from around the web and just turned them into anecdotes that involve me or my friends. I don’t have many friends. It’s, I haven’t done that much in my life. but I’ve got all these little anecdotes to hook ideas into people’s brains. And I, that is what teaching is to me. It is not marking. I was always like, for the first five years of my career, I had this existential guilt. People would be going home with bags of books and tick and tick.

And I would mark two or three things, a term which are meaningful. And I don’t like, why would I, The worst thing for me was when this idea of differentiated work became very popular and what, what, what the conceptualization was. I agree with, I am very much a scaffolding guy. So like the project, the idea, the thing we’re building is the same for everyone. We’d like you to get to this same place. But what I’m going to do as a teacher is I’m going to give. Scaffolding, so that if you need more help to get there, there is more things in place to help you get there. But what this idea of differentiated work turned into was, look at this perfect example. Here is, I don’t know, modern foreign language X.

Here’s a worksheet with lots of gaps, Here’s a worksheet with less gaps. Here’s a worksheet with less gaps in the words written in the bottom. And I’m like how is, this is not differentiation. This is three different worksheets that, that’s complete the box. I don’t understand the pedagogy behind it. And maybe that’s why I’m such a big Pedagogy Nerd. That’s why that’s why, to be honest working at Mindjoy has been amazing for me because everything in the company is pedagogy focused. Everyone’s teachers, everyone’s very much we understand the science of learning, we want it to happen.

And you used this beautiful phrase just a few minutes ago, which was, I think that the art of teaching is being lost. I think there is an artistry to the best teaching, but I think the vast majority of teaching is learnable and science. And I think the differentiating factor between a solidly good lesson and an outstanding lesson is the little bit of spark and joy that you can bring with our artistry as a teacher. And that, think about your favorite teachers as a child or as an adult, who made the biggest marks on you? For me, it was the weird and wacky ones. It was the ones with the best stories. It was the ones that weren’t absolute fascists. And I think that if you are going into a classroom to teach young people, you’ve got to go in with the idea that the only thing you can change in that classroom to influence them is you.

No amount of worksheets, no amount of content that you buy that you get from elsewhere. is going to influence how they engage with your lesson. That’s you. That’s your behavior. That’s the way you act. That’s the things you present them with. That’s your idea of pedagogy and what you like to do. And it is stuff that you can learn. And your book very rightly covers a lot of that. And your podcast with Andy Colley, was absolutely exciting. Like I was geeking out when you mentioned my favorite theory, which is semantic waves, which when I read that, I was like, Oh my God, there’s a word for what I’ve been doing. Wow. And I think so much of pedagogy and research is giving people a shared vocabulary to talk about.

And what I love about the future we’re heading towards is we’re heading towards a future where I can model a singular pedagogical style inside an AI, and I can push that AI to a student who can experience that, but they can experience it from a system that’s, That hasn’t had a bad night staying up with the baby. That hasn’t got 7B next, who are going to be screaming. There’s a bunch of things that AI has, which is which if you program it, you prompt it well, and that’s a skill we need to get as teachers as well. I think that’s worth saying. As a teacher, you need to go and learn how to prompt AIs because you don’t want to be someone who buys things off the shelf and has to use what’s there.

You want to be somebody that goes, actually I want to change this lesson in this way because I think this would be better for my learners. Again, the only thing you can change in the classroom is you. And the only thing you can change with AI is if you can adapt the prompt, learn how to do it. Come along to my workshops. That’s what we do there. We talk about those things. It’s a skill for the future. It is something you need because if you’ve got the skills to tell these bots how to interact with these students, how to bring these pedagogical strategies. I spent the weekend building a semantic waves bot because I was like, I need to turn this into something that I can push because I’m a massive nerd.

Like what else are the people at the football on Saturday? I’m there. with my notes out and my research and tapping away at a prompt and being like, can this work? Is this for me? And 

Alan: I think that one, I think that one sentence Dave probably sums up this podcast. I’m going to cut that out and I’m going to, I’m going to post it on social media. Um, “I spent the weekend making a semantic waves bot” said Dave, the lesson hacker. 

David: I like that idea, just the nerdiest quotes. 

Alan: This has become a very niche podcast now. Very niche podcast. 

David: Computer scientists who spend their Saturdays doing work. The thing is, there are hardware people, right? There are hardware people that spend their weekends with their Raspberry Pis and their soldering irons doing amazing projects.

I’d love to be one of those people. But My brain works with software. My brain is I’ve got this hardware in front of me, which is super capable. What can I do with it? And I think the reason that, again, we had a list of topics to talk about today. We had VR. I think I’ve covered that very quickly. I’m like too expensive, but cool. 

Alan: We had, we had robotics. We can maybe rattle through a few other topics before we wind up, but 

David: yeah, go on. I think like I can sum up robotics in a sentence for you. I’m like, Cool, but too expensive. Software is the only thing that we have in school that we can actually make an investment in a reasonable way. And especially if you’re on a departmental level budget. Now, I I was, I, as I said, most of my career is like a head of departments. I did a little bit of like senior leadership stuff. And then you’re talking about Big money, but you’re talking about big money that has to tick all the boxes across a school.

When you’re in a departmental level and you’re looking at software, you’re looking at things that are going to improve and enhance what you’re doing, but the money’s not a lot. So you can’t, again, I’m talking from a state school point of view here, but you can’t go out and you can’t go out and say, Yes, I’ve bought 30 Raspberry Pis and a bunch of kits and all these little bits, and we’re going to have a three week project doing hardware because, it’s just not affordable, is it?

And especially the rate at which those things end up getting destroyed because students make mistakes, as they should. I, the most costly lesson I ever had was when I brought in a processor that I was going to reuse in a different PC and was showing the students it, and they were having a look at it. And one of the students bent all the pins on it accidentally. 

And in that moment, I was like, that was a couple of hundred pounds down the drain because I was excited about showing them something. That happens all the time. With software, what you end up with is something that can push along the pedagogy, can push along the teaching and learning, can give you tools that isn’t going to cost the earth and that will run on pretty much anything.

And I taught a lot in one to one schools or schools where devices were like a thing that they could have, because I very that’s me. I very much think that if I can whip out my phone at any minute and look something up, students should be able to too, because I’ve taught in schools where the rules for teachers and rules for students were very different and I find it very hard to enforce rules on students that I don’t have to follow myself.

Advertisements

I’m like, I am a person that I like, I have lots of piercings, right? You probably don’t notice it on my videos a lot because they’re not very flashy, but whenever anybody meets me in real life, they go, Have you always had those piercings? And I genuinely remember having to crack down on, and this is in the last couple of years, crack down on piercings in students.

And I’m sat there with two fresh ear studs at the top of my ear. And I’m like how does that work? And it’s the same with phones. I think if there’s an expect, with any sort of device. We have, we as a culture now rely on this ability to pull out information at the drop of a hat to look things up.

And I do that all the time. If I’m in a conversation with a student and that they say, Oh, what about this? And I’m like, Oh, I’m not quite sure. Let’s have a look. If I’ve got my laptop there, I’ll look it up. But if I haven’t, the phone comes out because I’m like, Yeah, this, the conversation improves, the learning improves. Students should be able to do those same things. 

Alan: I can see that, but I can also even I struggle with the discipline of, getting your device out to look up the one thing and not go, Oh, I’ll scroll Twitter or threads these days rather than Twitter or whatever it’s called. 

David: Is threads still alive? I haven’t been on it in a while. 

Alan: Oh, it’s great now. Yeah. No, jump, jump back into threads. 

David: I have to jump in because one of the questions, one of the questions I had is I was big into EduTwitter when it was like a big thing with 10, 15 years ago. And recently, people don’t even argue during the holidays anymore.

What’s happened to EduTwitter? What’s going on? So where have people gone? 

Alan: I wrote a blog six months ago now saying, I’ve quit X, you should too. Because I just documented the fall of Twitter and how it’s been taken over by a white supremacist. I’m not joking. It is a dangerous place now for academics because if you believe in equality or diversity, you will get attacked.

If you, even if you talk about climate change, you will get attacked. If you say anything, what they call woke, you’ll get attacked. And those attacks, 

David: I’ve got the trans flag in my bio. I get attacked all the time. 

Alan: Exactly. But that’s the thing, but we know that these these attacks can spill over into the real world as in people get physically attacked and there have been the owner of Twitter or the owner of X himself has amplified Right wing attacks on vocal students and so on and force people into hiding. It is a horrible place. So anyway, that’s my little rant about it. 

David: I don’t think it’s a rant. I don’t think, I don’t think it’s unnecessary. I think the important thing as teachers is that we’re all very aware. We need to model the behaviors we want to see in the real world to our students.

And unfortunately the sort of interactions that you have on X and Twitter with the extreme. Minority. Yeah. And not the sort of things you want to model. So I can completely understand why so many educators have fell away. But I really miss that community of practice, that sort of critical friend, that, that group of educators that would just go, I’m trying this, what do you think? And then it would be a great conversation about those one things. Now I found those practice, I found smaller versions of those communities of practice on LinkedIn, certainly. Which is, at least it’s. At least it’s unblocked in most schools because it’s like a business y thing.

If you are grateful for my blog, please buy my books here or buy me a coffee at ko-fi.com/mraharrisoncs, thanks!

And there’s private Facebook groups which replicate it, but I think I still miss the ability for me, I finished my dinner. There’s nothing really on TV. I’ve got no mini projects to do. What can, what conversations are going on about education? Things I actually care about?

Alan: No, absolutely. So in an ideal world, I’d love the kids to be able to whip out their devices and look things up. I just, I feel that the temptation to do other things and the possibility of distraction, which there’s a lot of evidence for, means that that’s a really difficult thing to to, to manage.

David: I do agree. And I think in the same breath. I agree. And I think that I have no beef with schools that ban phones or ban devices at all. I don’t, they’re just not for me. They’re not my sort of school because I think this is important with the way that teachers, we’re going off, off topic a little bit here, but I think it’s important for how teachers apply for schools as well.

I used to apply for schools with a CV. Which was very colorful, which was very graphic design y, which had jokes in it, which had a silly picture of me pulling a face. And I would do that because I know that teachers where everyone’s poo faced and are very serious about things aren’t schools for me. So teach, like anybody that would get that CV in a bundle of an application and go, Bring this guy in, let’s see what we want to talk to him about. That’s a school for me and that did me very well in my career.  

Alan: It’s a good message. To be honest, as a computer science teacher, we are in a privileged position in which we are much in demand and we can probably work anywhere. So that’s going to work for us, where it might not work for an art teacher, ironically. Because the art teacher is often more likely to have the piercings and nail polish and so on. But um, but yeah, use your privilege computing teachers. You are much in demand and if you’re not enjoying where you are and you can’t be yourself in the classroom, have a look around.

David: Yeah. 

Alan: Absolutely. 

 Well, it was bound to happen sooner or later when I get talking to someone fascinating and we bounce ideas around, we can’t stop. David and I talked for nearly 90 minutes and I ended up with far too much content for one episode. So I’m splitting this bumper recording over two episodes of the pod. You can look forward to the second half. Where Dave and I really get into AI next week on how to teach computer science. 

 However, towards the end of our chat, Dave issued me a challenge. Let’s hear what happened as I skip to what became the mind joy chatbot challenge.

Alan: My favorite. Chatbot at the minute really is probably cs50. ai from Harvard because it’s, it’s got guardrails so it doesn’t hallucinate quite as much about um, some stuff and, and it’s better.

David: I’m putting faces at you, but I’ll tell you why in a minute. 

Alan: Yeah, so Dave’s making a funny face for those listening about the word guardrails. So it’s about the CS50 bot in particular. CS50 bot. Um, Yeah, so you can ask it questions about programming and it’ll uh, it’ll guide you towards the answer rather than just, here’s the code. It’ll have a Socratic conversation, as you mentioned earlier. What are your, What are your issues with CS50 then? 

David: So the reason I sort of sucked my teeth and did the, the um, ooo emoji, is because that is a commoditization of very simple prompting. And I have an issue with commoditization of, again, we talked about this, worksheet generators. In my mind, the CS50 bot is the same as a worksheet generator. It is a closed system. It is something that I can’t impact as a teacher. It is something that I can’t edit the bot is great, but it’s a general purpose teaching bot. And there’s so much more we can do with AI if we make AI part of the lesson and we build the lesson around, I’ll get the, I’ll get the bot to do this, that will help the students do this.

And therefore, the lesson can be different. It can be more exciting. It can be, like you can build a bot to help the student with PRIMM, to help them work through how they should do it. Let them have those questions. I think it will do this. And the AI can come back and say actually, let’s have a look at how that would work. And the conversations that you would have, they are what I want from an AI, not this generic tool. So that’s why I was sucking my teeth. 

Alan: No, absolutely. I think that. The situation is that probably you could build a better bot than cs50. ai, but not all the teachers listening to this. 

David: I would say anyone listening to this podcast can build a better bot than cs50 have got at the moment. And I’m no shade on cs50, they’ve done a great job, it’s a beautiful bot, but I guarantee you if everyone listening to this podcast sign up for one of my workshops and I give them half an hour on prompt engineering, right? We will all be building bots that are suitable for our classrooms, suitable for our learners, who we know better. I promise you if you want, I’ll send you a code and we can send out an invite to all the audience. I promise you every person in this, listening to this podcast can do a better job than CS50 with 30 minutes of training and a bit of time twiddling around with it. 

Alan: I, challenge accepted, Dave. What I’ll do is I’ll get on a call with you after this, I will take you up on your offer and we’ll build a bot together. And have some fun. Um, Talking of fun. 

David: What I will say is in May, we are having a computer science themed month at Mindjoy. workshops will be all based on computer science. Like what we’re pushing out will be based around computer science, which is great because I know computer scientists, so that’s a bit of fun. But like. 

Alan: Where can we find out, where can we find out more about those workshops, Dave?

David: This is actually set up well, mindjoy. com, MINDJOY. COM is where you’ll find all the workshops and all the stuff we’re doing with AI. But genuinely, like I, I know that I’ve gone on about AI a lot this episode, and we have gone very long, my friend, which I, because we’ve been enjoying ourselves, I think.

Alan: I think that is probably a good point to start wrapping up. It seems we started talking about wrapping up about an hour ago. I think probably we should. 

David: I’m off to start prompting AI in the random bits of pedagogy to see what I can do. 

Alan: Dave, it’s been brilliant I will take you up on your offer. Thanks for coming on.

David: No worries, buddy. I appreciate it. And long may this podcast keep going. Cause I have a great time listening to it. 

Alan: Thank you very much. Thanks for your kind words about the podcast and the books.

David: If you’ve not bought the books, please do. Learn, how to learn computer science is my favorite of the two.

Alan: Alright then Dave, have a nice day. I’ll catch up with you again soon. Cheers. Thank you. Bye then.

 So it’s happening. David Morgan and I are hosting a live event on Thursday, 9th of May, 2024. at, 5:00 PM. See mind joy.com. And scroll down to upcoming events or see my blog . httcs.online/blog, or check the podcast, show notes for more details. David and I will create a coding companion live on air. I have no idea what’s going to happen, but I’m sure it will be lit as the kids apparently don’t say anymore. So it’s nearly time to wrap up. I’m going to play beat saber on my Meta quest. I was thinking about VR after our chat. And I, I wear glasses and it’s a bit of a hassle getting the headset on. And the other issue is no one else can see what I’m doing unless I cast to the TV. And that’s a bit of a faff as well. And while I’m using it, nobody else in the family can. So I thought. Wouldn’t it be good if we all had a headset each, but that’s expensive and we still couldn’t see each other or share popcorn and stuff like that. So maybe. What we need is one big VR headset we can all use maybe a big room sized one we walk into with a big screen at the end. And. And comfy seats. So you can enjoy a movie together and share popcorn and maybe a hot dog. That would be amazing. 

 So that was a fun episode to make our attempt to answer the question. What is the future of work and school. Part two is coming next week. Hope you enjoyed our ramblings. Let me know in the comments or on the socials. This has been how to teach computer science, the podcast I’m Alan Harrison, please do visit my website. HTTCS dot online and buy my books. Don’t forget. You heard David tell you how much he enjoyed the books today. And don’t forget last week, Dave Hillyard of Craig and Dave said this. 

Dave: I think the final thing I would say is that your book is great. How to teach computer science, I think, is excellent for teachers. How to learn computer science, I think, is essential reading for all students, and my recommendation would be get a class set, and I’m not just saying this because you’re the author, I genuinely mean it. Get a class set of these books, hand them out, that is your background reading. 

So buy the books, if you already have the books, buy me a coffee, please at ko-fi.com/mraharrisoncs all links on my blog at HTTCS dot online slash blog. And subscribe now. So you don’t miss a thing. Check out mindjoy.com or my blog for the live event on the 9th of May. So have a great weekend and I’ll catch you next week.

If you are grateful for my blog, please buy my books here or buy me a coffee at ko-fi.com/mraharrisoncs, thanks!
Categories
AI computing teaching and learning

Stop calling it cheating.

Stop calling it “cheating”, take a step back and consider why you set that assignment in that way and what you hoped to achieve by it. There might be a better way.

They’ve used AI to cheat!

Now if you’ve ever said this, or even thought it, then some things are clear.

  • One: you have set a piece of work, usually called an assignment, to be completed outside the classroom.
  • Two: marking or grading the submission is important to you: perhaps the grade you give needs to be recorded, reported to stakeholders or counts towards some certificate of achievement.
  • And three: that you expected (or hoped) the students would complete the work independently, using only what they know and perhaps some “approved” source material such as a textbook or a website, such that what was handed in accurately reflected what they knew.

In this article I hope to encourage you to question all three of the above criteria before setting an assignment, and a fourth one, namely, that you need to grade that assignment at all. Because it is only by such introspection that we will arrive at a solution to the idea that your assessments are unreliable because of “cheating” with AI.

Why assess?

In this presentation on assessment, Tom Sherrington explains that assessment serves at least two different purposes: feedback and reporting. Formative assessment provides feedback to students and teachers informing the teaching and learning process, while an assessment designed to report progress to stakeholders can be useful for such a purpose but is much less likely to have an impact on future learning.

We must therefore consider why we are assessing, and ensure the vast majority of our assessments are of the formative variety, giving students insights they can use to answer the question: “What do I need to do in order to achieve my goals?”

Formative assessment helps the teacher too, showing them where they need to direct their efforts in instruction and curriculum design. If the data shows that a topic is poorly understood then we can re-teach that topic, if on the other hand they have grasped it early, we can move on more quickly.

When teachers complain that students have used generative AI (GAI) tools such as ChatGPT or Bard, what they usually mean is that some piece of creative work being used as a summative assessment appears to be the work of a GAI, and therefore it is of little validity as a measure of progress. However, to think like this suggests an over-reliance on the validity of such assessments in the first place, given that “cheating” was entirely possible before GAI in the form of copying, plagiarism and essay mills. Also the idea that an essay completed without any such assistance would somehow be an entirely valid, reliable measure of a student’s abilities is a flawed notion in the first place. All assessment is an unreliable proxy for what we would really like to know, which is “what have they retained about this topic (domain)?”

Someone conducting an educational assessment is generally interested in the ability of the result of the assessment to stand as a proxy for some wider domain (emphasis mine).

Dylan Wiliam

Generally these complaints about cheating arise only when performing summative assessment: when the teacher needs to mark or grade the assessment, thus the result is being used to report to stakeholders on the students’ performance, or counts towards an award (such as a diploma or certificate). But as we heard above from Sherrington and Wiliam, this type of assessment has limited validity and has little impact on future learning.

Why the essay is dead

[Teachers should] assume that 100 percent of their students are using ChatGPT and other generative A.I. tools on every assignment, in every subject, unless they’re being physically supervised inside a school building.

Kevin Roose in the New York Times 24th August 2023

It’s true, the independent essay or other creative written assignment is dead as a valid (reliable) measure of what students have learned. Even if you are testing different forms of knowledge, to include declarative knowledge as well as practical knowledge (skills) and conditional knowledge (judgement) – if the means of demonstrating this learning is via an essay completed outside the classroom, you cannot rely on the results because of the ease of use of GAI on top of the more traditional methods of “cheating” mentioned above. Neither can we rely on so-called AI detectors, because they produce too many false negatives and positives, and students can learn to game the detector, or indeed get GAI to do so!

But you may have noticed that I have made the same point a few times now, this is only an issue if we need a reliable, summative assessment, for the purposes of reporting to stakeholders or awarding a certificate. How many of your assignments genuinely have to be used in this way? Can you set a supervised assessment in class once per term, and get enough data from that to feed your reporting systems, and switch out all your other assignments for formative assessment that truly moves the needle of attainment?

Vintage line drawing of a human head labelled with traits such as benevolence and cautiousness, historically used by phrenologists

All assessment measures a flawed proxy of what is inside their heads.
Image Credit: rawpixel.com

Moving to formative assessment

In the UK, compulsory schooling (K-12) is assessed with terminal exams, at 16 and at 18. We do not have a high-school diploma, grade point average (GPA) or a tradition of graded essays and term papers. It’s therefore easier in the UK to favour formative assessment. Although schools require performance data at least once per term, how this is gathered in each subject is often a matter for the subject leader.

As a Head of Computing I would usually capture my data through a mixture of auto-marking tests – making good use of multiple-choice questions (MCQs) – and a short written test conducted in class maybe once per term. Students on GCSE courses (14-16, years 10 to 11) would sit two “mock exams”, in the summer of Y10 and around Christmas in Y11. A-level students (16-18, years 12 and 13) would sit a written test at the end of each unit, so around 20 tests across the two years. I would set lots of independent work to be completed outside the classroom, but crucially none of this would be marked or graded beyond a measure of effort – did they put sufficient work in?

But importantly, I would use lessons to deliver new material, yes, but also to check for understanding, support the learners in understanding what they need to do next, and use formative assessment techniques to really help them make progress. Let the students assess themselves against criteria you set (self-assessment) or mark each others’ work (peer assess).

Or in a practical programming lesson where they are all solving a series of problems, I would walk the room helping them, and they would help each other. Or if it’s a GCSE or A-level class, and I’ve set an exam question such as “How will robotics affect the world of work?”, I will give them ten minutes then choose some students’ work to critique as a class, then give them more time to improve their own work: rinse and repeat. Without computers, a teacher visualiser device is all you need and this technique is explained here.

The “ungrading” movement

Ungrading is an approach that deviates from traditional grading systems, favouring a more feedback-centric model. Instead of focusing on scores or letter grades, the emphasis shifts towards providing detailed, constructive feedback, encouraging students to reflect on their learning and grow from their experiences.

Leon Furze

This movement away from graded assignments in the US sounds a lot like what goes on in many UK schools already, and I recommend US readers of this blog check out the link above, or Jesse Stommel’s blog post here. The case for ungrading is that a focus on grades drives students to engage in academic dishonesty. 

When the primary aim of education shifts towards attaining higher grades rather than gaining knowledge and honing skills, students are more likely to turn to GAI for completing their assignments.

Emily Pitts Donahoe

Indeed, for students with perhaps 20 essays each term, many with part-time jobs or caring responsibilities, and a GPA to maintain, using GAI is not “cheating” it’s sandbagging their future. And as I wrote in my previous blog on GAI, ChatGPT can level the playing-field for students with disabilities or assist learners for whom English is an additional language

So wherever you teach, moving away from graded assignments removes one of the drivers of “cheating”. If you can deliver sufficient reportable data with fewer graded assignments, then you will get more authentic work from the students.

Feedback and motivation

I want to go back to Tom Sherrington’s slides and revisit the purpose of assessment. Remember, if you’re grading, you’re not giving much formative feedback.

A component of learning, as students build their schema for any given knowledge domain, is a metacognitive process that drives motivation and intentionality: a knowledge of self – what do I know? What do I need to know/do/focus my attention and effort on in order to achieve goals? 

Tom Sherrington

Once we start giving feedback instead of grades, showing the learners that we care about their progress, then chances are they will care more about the process too. Assignments will become genuine expressions of what they can do, and they will value your feedback and become more motivated to do their best work. Not always, and not all students, but we will move the needle if we give it our best shot.

Categories
AI computing general teaching and learning tech

ChatGPT will change everything. No, not like that.

A lot of column-inches and a bazillion frantic tweets have been bashed out recently about the AI tool ChatGPT: the public, text interface to a Large Language Model (LLM) created by the OpenAI consortium. Originally a not-for-profit body which boasted Elon Musk as one of its original investors, OpenAI is now unashamedly for-profit and in November 2022 launched ChatGPT, a language model built on GPT3, the third iteration of their “generative, pre-trained transformer” software. This tool can process natural language text and respond with natural-sounding text back. It also remembers conversations, hence the “chat” element, and this is what makes it more powerful than previous iterations: you can refine your query over several inputs to get better results.

Advertisements

AI services like ChatGPT join a long line of technologies to have been described as both “dangerous”, downsides from its use as a class cheat’s superpower, to a phishing and identity fraud weapon. it’s “the end of assessment as we know it’ because “many of the problems we set in secondary school can now be solved by apps… It is not a good sign that we still teach and test mathematical material in such a routine way that free off-the-shelf systems like these can handle lots of it with ease’ – economist Daniel Susskind in his book A World Without Work.

Image taken from Washington Post website. Shows a chatbot conversation. First speech bubble says "Rephrase: Laura is you in Wednesday - got pics for you - ben" and chatbot speech bubble shows a well-formatted, semi-formal letter style message that begins "Dear Laura, Hope you're doing well. I wanted to check if you'll be in on Wednesday as I have some photos... Best Regards, Ben".

But we’ve been here before. The internet was going to spell the end of academic assessment in the 90s. In truth it didn’t change much, except for democratising information so you didn’t need to be in school to learn. If we’re honest with ourselves, outside of controlled conditions such as the exam hall, there are a myriad ways to cheat already: copying from others, searching online or using an online service to do your homework for you, sometimes called an essay mill. If a piece of work is important (such as assessed coursework or “controlled assessment” work) then the teacher should already have some skill in plagiarism-checking. Online services such as Turnitin are widely used, but I’ve always found simply asking a student to explain their work, called a “viva voce” interview in academia, does the trick. You may not need to do this with 100% of submissions, just a 10% check might be sufficient to deter serious plagiarism.

And if you absolutely must have confidence the submission is the students own work, then conduct a test in controlled conditions with no devices allowed. But only a small number of pieces of work (often just a summative test of required knowledge to progress to the next stage, e.g. the GCSE’s and A-levels in the UK or the college-entrance-assisting AP tests in the US, and the final exams of a degree course) over a student’s lifetime should require this level of scrutiny. Everything else should be treated as formative and afforded a lesser degree of validity and therefore require less strict control.

Most of my students work is either self- or peer-assessed. A mixture of online self-assessment using platforms like Quizlet (most subjects) or SmartRevise (Computing and Business only at the moment) get the bulk of the feedback done cost-free, and the rest is largely done by the students with lots of guidance from me. I’m glad the UK never adopted the American high-school system of grade-point average (GPA) scoring, not least because it penalises poor early performance which is unfair to immigrants and those with health issues, and is linked with self-esteem issues, but because it makes every piece of work high-stakes and high-cost to the teacher. When both teacher and student are stretched to the max by tests every semester, there is no space to relax and enjoy the journey. And pity the student who gets a C during the grief of a bereavement which prevents them getting the required GPA for their college of choice no matter what they do next. (If you’re in the UK, thinking “glad we don’t have the GPA system here”, count how many controlled tests and data drops you must do each year, and ponder a moment).

Advertisements

Let’s remember the purpose of assessing work. All assessment is a surrogate for what we want to know: what is in their heads. Assessment is not an end in itself, the mark should reflect some measure of achievement that helps both teacher and student understand how to make progress. Let’s not forget that what we want to achieve is an improvement in learning, what’s in their head when they leave school, not what they wrote in a paper when they were eleven or fifteen. As Tom Sherrington writes:

If testing is going to have an effect on the learning process, it needs to have an outcome that will help students to develop a sense of themselves as learners and an awareness of what else there is left to learn. 

Tom Sherrington’s TeacherHead blog, link

As Daisy Christodoulou writes, the struggle, not the end product, is the point:

If a student struggles for an hour over an extended piece of writing and then finds that a computer has surpassed it in seconds, it is entirely possible they will feel demotivated. What they need to hear from adults is don’t worry, your work is of value, you’re on a journey and you are developing your own writing skills. 

Daisy Christodoulou’s No More Marking blog, link

Design your assessments so they create actionable feedback, not just test scores. Furnish the students with marking rubrics ahead of the assignment, and get them to mark themselves against the rubrics before handing in. If they’re using ChatGPT at home to write essays, they might be short-circuiting part of the process, so have the class critique each-others essays in class afterwards. Create model answers or “what a good one looks like” WAGOLLs they can mark themselves against, or choose a student’s answer that is high quality and work with the class to determine what makes it so. Joe Kirby’s seminal 2015 blog post “Marking is a Hornet, Feedback is a Butterfly” is still my go-to article for in-class feedback ideas that can be re-purposed in the ChatGPT age, even to make the most of so-called “plagiarised” work.

Back to ChatGPT and the “plagiarism panic”. Too often we forget the upsides of a new technology in all the swirling panic about its dangers. For LLMs like ChatGPT these include levelling the playing-field for people with disabilities or assisting people for whom English is an additional language. Make sure your EAL students have access to it and know how to use it. Discuss with your SENCO how students might use it to overcome learning difficulties like dyslexia and dyspraxia. As this article explains, it’s already helping a landscaper with low literacy write professional-sounding emails to customers (see image above), and writing assertive letters to a landlord on behalf of a shy tenant regarding a water leak (the leak was fixed in 3 days). We demonise this technology at our peril.

And with any luck, ChatGPT might bring down the GPA system and its pale imitations in the UK, with all the inequities those systems perpetuate. Which can’t be a bad thing.

If you enjoy my blog, why not buy me a coffee? And I talk much more about AI in the context of the Computer Science GCSE in my book.

If you are grateful for my blog, please buy my books here or buy me a coffee at ko-fi.com/mraharrisoncs, thanks!