"Tina Grotzer: Once you start to know what your mind can do that's so much better than AI, it kind of makes sense that some tasks are well-relegated to AI and other tasks are not. That is going to be a constant challenge to figure out those relationships and lines over time. Samantha Laine Perfas: As generative AI tools become more ubiquitous, there's a debate around whether or not they should be embraced in spaces of learning."
"Recent reports suggest that the risks of using these tools might outweigh the benefits, threatening cognitive development by doing the thinking for their users. Homework that used to take hours of practice and comprehension is now completed in minutes, potentially undercutting students' development of basic skills. This is forcing educators into a dilemma: How do they make the most of AI's potential, while also protecting students' ability to think for themselves?"
"Michael Brenner: I'm Michael Brenner. I'm the Catalyst Professor of Applied Mathematics in the School of Engineering and Applied Sciences at Harvard. Laine Perfas: He is also a research scientist at Google, where he runs a team that studies how large language models can accelerate science. Then: Grotzer: Tina Grotzer. I am on the faculty at the Graduate School of Education."
Generative AI tools are becoming widespread and raise a debate about their role in learning. Reports indicate risks to cognitive development when AI performs thinking tasks for users, enabling homework to be completed rapidly and potentially undermining practice-based skill development. Educators face a dilemma of maximizing AI's potential while preserving students' ability to think independently. Determining which tasks are appropriate for AI and which should remain human-driven will require ongoing judgment. Researchers study how large language models can accelerate scientific work and how to design AI tools that support rather than harm children's development.
Read at Harvard Gazette
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]