On “The effect of ChatGPT on students’ learning performance, learning perception, and higher-order thinking: insights from a meta-analysis” and its discontents
Shifting Baseline Disorders. Unsafe at any speed, ChatGPT.
The meta studies on introducing Chromebooks in K6, yep. Everything has gone to shit in schools using that dirty trickster, but the studies contradict what I see with my eyes substituting in K12.
Chronicle of higher education adores AI and the like.
The fabricated "studies" will continue to rationalize complete deployment of ChatGPT in all sectors of society.
Tell me more about your experiences. It would be interesting to collect such observations among teachers and sort of build on where Postman left off in the mid-80s, pass through Google and the Chromebook & Smartphone, into the realm of generative AI.
You are holding the weight of western civilization practically on your own.
Rot, yes.
Foundations, vaporized.
Auto-undermining of everything everywhere, establishment policy.
And there you are, standing.
After many years in Sweden myself I can’t help but wonder, are you the only Swede standing? I know just a few others, one YouTube guy, and a handful of others forced into silence
A one-eyed moron leading the blind in the land of chocolate zombies. We're in trouble bro
But there are a lot of critical voices out there -- even in academia, it's just that they don't get any airtime (and are throttled by various mechanisms of shadowbanning).
We should talk soon! Are both of you still in the States?
Thanks. Yeah, that's exactly what I see as well. They love it in principle (and it would cut a lot of expenditures, no?), but genuine teachers almost all loathe it.
I mean, it might be better (in a very narrow sense in terms of e.g. learning English) to put kids in front of chatGPT instead of locking them into a coal chamber with a textbook), but that also disregards all the indirect drawbacks.
Yeah, there was supposed to be an image of apples and oranges up there but it glitched out somehow. :(
"A study found that humans can run almost the same speed over lumpy terrain as over flat terrain. Meanwhile, robots can’t run at all over lumpy terrain because it takes too much processing power. " Henry Abbot. something like 77% of our brain is about processing movement. The language center sits atop the movement center. I feel there is a allegory lurking in there. But the point is, not even the most sophisticated robot/android can over difficult terrain. Just sayin'
And there was an example the other day how an Atari from the 70s easily defeated chatGPT in chess.
The alchemy here -- the magic -- is in actually getting people to believe that this stuff is thinking, on some level. It's even in the EU AI legislation, it's here literally defined as computer programs that "make inferences". No, it definitely does not "make inferences".
absolutely. I said the other day, nearly ALL writing about AI is anthropomorphic. Its so deeply baked into the conceptual foundation of artificial intelligence that it seems it cannot at all be escaped.
Something else genuine teachers loathe is when we are battered by inane concepts like "higher order thinking". I remember an excruciating lecture from a PE teacher, reading from a powerpoint presentation, all about how some new program being implemented promoted higher order thinking. She even managed to stumble over the pronunciation of some big words. But, like, expert.
Shifting Baseline Disorders. Unsafe at any speed, ChatGPT.
The meta studies on introducing Chromebooks in K6, yep. Everything has gone to shit in schools using that dirty trickster, but the studies contradict what I see with my eyes substituting in K12.
Chronicle of higher education adores AI and the like.
The fabricated "studies" will continue to rationalize complete deployment of ChatGPT in all sectors of society.
Tell me more about your experiences. It would be interesting to collect such observations among teachers and sort of build on where Postman left off in the mid-80s, pass through Google and the Chromebook & Smartphone, into the realm of generative AI.
You are holding the weight of western civilization practically on your own.
Rot, yes.
Foundations, vaporized.
Auto-undermining of everything everywhere, establishment policy.
And there you are, standing.
After many years in Sweden myself I can’t help but wonder, are you the only Swede standing? I know just a few others, one YouTube guy, and a handful of others forced into silence
A one-eyed moron leading the blind in the land of chocolate zombies. We're in trouble bro
But there are a lot of critical voices out there -- even in academia, it's just that they don't get any airtime (and are throttled by various mechanisms of shadowbanning).
We should talk soon! Are both of you still in the States?
One of us is, not a state, a commonwealth, land of colonel sanders and hunter s Thompson, Muhammad Ali and others. Waiting for L
am sharing. This is so typical and as paul notes, public ed LOVES AI.....even if many many teachers do not.
also ....create an image for your articles on substack .---- useful when sharing
Thanks. Yeah, that's exactly what I see as well. They love it in principle (and it would cut a lot of expenditures, no?), but genuine teachers almost all loathe it.
I mean, it might be better (in a very narrow sense in terms of e.g. learning English) to put kids in front of chatGPT instead of locking them into a coal chamber with a textbook), but that also disregards all the indirect drawbacks.
Yeah, there was supposed to be an image of apples and oranges up there but it glitched out somehow. :(
"A study found that humans can run almost the same speed over lumpy terrain as over flat terrain. Meanwhile, robots can’t run at all over lumpy terrain because it takes too much processing power. " Henry Abbot. something like 77% of our brain is about processing movement. The language center sits atop the movement center. I feel there is a allegory lurking in there. But the point is, not even the most sophisticated robot/android can over difficult terrain. Just sayin'
And there was an example the other day how an Atari from the 70s easily defeated chatGPT in chess.
The alchemy here -- the magic -- is in actually getting people to believe that this stuff is thinking, on some level. It's even in the EU AI legislation, it's here literally defined as computer programs that "make inferences". No, it definitely does not "make inferences".
absolutely. I said the other day, nearly ALL writing about AI is anthropomorphic. Its so deeply baked into the conceptual foundation of artificial intelligence that it seems it cannot at all be escaped.
Even the name, AI, is anthropomorphic.
Something else genuine teachers loathe is when we are battered by inane concepts like "higher order thinking". I remember an excruciating lecture from a PE teacher, reading from a powerpoint presentation, all about how some new program being implemented promoted higher order thinking. She even managed to stumble over the pronunciation of some big words. But, like, expert.
Here...note how nothing was said in this rather long article. https://www.nytimes.com/2025/05/23/podcasts/google-ai-demis-hassabis-hard-fork.html
https://x.com/spectatorindex/status/1934739681549471758