Hot off the press!
This article on the use of AI in education, arguing for a more systematic, objective, & research grounded approach to integrating AI tools into teachers' lessons & students' learning routines has just been published. Well worth a read:
Yes, there have been so many projects that have claimed to revolutionise education. There's also the one laptop per child programme & the computer in a hole in the wall in remote villages experiments that both made extraordinary claims but it later turned out to be a lot of hype & clever marketing & the supporting research turned out to be poorly designed junk. Here's a couple of interesting, entertaining, & well-informed videos of presentations...
"The Most Persistent Myth," 1 Dec 2014, video here: (Running time: 0:07:22)
Abstract
Many technologies have promised to revolutionize education, but so far none has. With that in mind, what could revolutionize education? These ideas have been percolating since I wrote my PhD in physics education. I have also discussed this topic with CGP Grey, whose view of the future of education differs significantly from mine. I think it is instructive that each new technology has appeared to be so transformative. You can imagine, for example, that motion pictures must have seemed like a revolutionary learning technology. After all they did revolutionize entertainment, yet failed to make significant inroads into the classroom. TV and video seem like a cheaper, scaled back film, but they too failed to live up to expectations. Now there is a glut of information and video on the internet so should we expect it to revolutionize education? My view is that it won't, for two reasons:
1. Technology is not inherently superior, animations over static graphics, videoed presentations over live lectures etc. and
2. Learning is inherently a social activity, motivated and encouraged by interactions with others.
Filmed and edited by Pierce Cook, supported by Screen Australia's Skip Ahead program. Music By Kevin MacLeod, www.incompetech.com "The Builder" and by Amarante Music.
A more recent presentation by the same guy, Derek Muller, about AI, "What Everyone Gets Wrong About AI and Learning," 8 Apr 2025, video here: (Running time: 1:15:10)
Abstract
AI is advancing faster than anyone predicted—and it’s already reshaping industries around the world. But what does that mean for education? In this livestream, @veritasium's Derek Muller explores how AI might change how we teach and learn, drawing on insights from past tech shifts and core principles of cognitive science. While AI presents exciting opportunities, it also introduces real risks—especially when it comes to how our brains build knowledge and expertise. Join us for a thought-provoking conversation about the future of education in an AI-powered world.
About the Speaker: Derek Muller is a science communicator, filmmaker, and the creator of the popular YouTube channel @veritasium. With a PhD in physics education, he’s spent over a decade creating videos that challenge misconceptions and make complex science accessible. He’s also hosted documentary series like Uranium – Twisting the Dragon’s Tail and contributed to Bill Nye Saves the World on Netflix.
I've been in CALL (computer assisted language learning) for 25 years. I've seen new technologies come & go & I've studied the history of IT in education. Generally speaking, much of the research is of poor quality & there seems to be an inherent bias in favour, i.e. the people who conduct the research are often enthusiasts, even evangelicals in favour of IT in classrooms. That's not to say that there isn't good quality research around, there is, but it tends to paint a more modest picture of effect sizes & more caveats than enthusiasts typically speak or write about.
AI is yet another IT tool & it's going through the typical Gartner hype cycle at the moment, & there are some very vocal people with little or no knowledge or experience in education promising a revolution. They're giddy with excitement. Importantly, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. I suspect that it's too soon for that evidence to have emerged yet.
What's more, as always, the method (strategies, techniques, sequencing, evidence-informed principles & practices, etc.) are more important than the medium used (The way that our food is delivered doesn't do much to alter its nutritional value, as the old analogy in education research goes). LLMs are generated from historical data & so will tend to entrench historical teaching methods & so far, the most popular historical methods have had a poor track record of delivering learning gains (e.g. See: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1207/s15326985ep4102_1). If you prompt any LLM to design lesson plans or give advice about methodology, they return a barrage of edu-myths & poor pedagogical practices. Prof. Paul Kirschner lists 10 of the common edu-myths here: https://randomthoughtsandideas926468149.wordpress.com/2020/03/22/the-ten-deadly-sins-of-education/ & I've seen all of these, as well as assumptions about learning based on these, returned from LLMs consistently.
And, as Larry Cuban has frequently pointed out (https://larrycuban.wordpress.com/), education just doesn't do "revolutions" no matter how much the latest generation of pundits & billionaires would like to believe otherwise. Education changes in small increments &, in many areas, it still has a lot of growing up to do, i.e. becoming less ideological & more rational & evidence-informed & more responsive to the potential benefits of changing how classroom teaching is done, before it can be called a professional field in the way that medicine & engineering are.
Finally, I'm confident that some practical & beneficial uses of LLMs in support of education will emerge. However, I think it's still too early to predict what those might be. I have some ideas of my own but I lack the time & resources to run adequately controlled studies & I suffer from the curse of knowledge, i.e. I know a lot more about my field than the vast majority of teachers in it; what seems simple & straightforward to me is mind-bogglingly complex & opaque to most teachers (See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curse_of_knowledge). Only when further independent evidence comes in & when I attempt to train other teachers in how to reproduce what I'm developing will the challenges to practical uses of LLMs in education become clear... at least to me. For example, knowing what a student needs to work on next, knowing the underlying science of how they need to work on it for good results, & then being able to design appropriate prompts to return useful responses from an LLM is something that many teachers are struggling with (generic prompts return generic, ineffective & often counter-productive responses). It takes a lot of specialist knowledge & experience (expertise) to be able to do that, let alone teach others how to do it.
Let's see what unfolds, shall we?
My guess would be that the US intelligence agencies are pulling out all the stops to try to maintain good relations with their EU counterparts but they can't offer guarantees or even assurances when the people in charge at the White House don't understand how to manage diplomatic relations constructively.
The US agencies can say that it's only for 4 years & that things may return back to "normal" after that. Will cooperation be, at least partially, put on hold in the hope that things will eventually improve?
In the meantime, how far do you think this situation will contribute to accelerating/intensifying efforts to build out more independent IT infrastructure?
Yes, it's important to point out the WEIRD* phenomenon. There are other studies that show similar biases. In all cases, there's a bias against female teaching staff; an important consideration in all cases, to at least some degree.