Story 1: “Control Over Chaos: Why AI Needs to be Implemented Inside the Classroom” by Jose Garcia
An opinion piece by Jose Garcia on the role of AI in the classroom opens by looking to past historical moments that had instilled similar anxieties, such as the Industrial Revolution and technological advances, such as calculators and modern weaponry, to highlight the age-old ebb and flow of expanding our world. Through these examples, he can argue that against the worst scenarios of their time, the calculator didn’t replace the student, modern rifles didn’t replace soldiers, and AI will not replace students/education. Garcia moves into the specifics of AI where he explains the differences between general AI, which attempts to solve previously unsolvable problems that appear scary and unknown to us, and narrow AI, which is confined to limitations set by human code writers. Harkening back to his previous historical comparisons, he claims humans have always aimed to improve how we process information. Just as it was with mathematical technologies like calculators, the tools helped people excel. Moving into some hard data, we see that 56% of college students use AI within their studies, and 53% have actual coursework that requires it. Rounding out this information, the argument ends in a call to action. While individual preferences or opinions may be opposed to AI, it cannot alter the fact that it is already here, being used, and has become a tool like many other technologies to grow our scope of knowledge. Citing Harvard, a prestigious leader in education, as an example of those who welcome change rather than fight against it in chaos, Garcia’s ultimate claim ends with looking to a future where AI is inevitable but harnessed for good.
Story 2: “Dialogue and Action” Panelists Weigh Free Speech and Hate Speech on University Campuses” by Angelina Li https://www.bcheights.com/2024/01/31/dialogue-and-action-panelists-weigh-free-speech-and-hate-speech-on-university-campuses/
This article by Angelina Li explores the controversial topic of free speech on college campuses. Li offers authoritative sources such as law professor Kent Greenfield and professor and former Supreme Judicial Court in Massachusetts Roderick Ireland to frame the story. For instance, Greenfield feels that the status quo of college campuses’ take on free speech creates something like a hostile work environment that disproportionately affects the most marginalized members of a college community. Ireland alleges that structure and rules can allow for more constructive dialogues on the limitations of free speech. Li also adds a personal anecdote from a philosophy professor, Andrew Leong, that helps the reader resonate with realities for minorities such as immigrant children who face school bullying. As an educator, he wishes to create a learning environment where control is given to stop those situations. Another law professor, Andrew Sellars, broadens the scope of the conversation and examines the power dynamics that go hand in hand with hate speech on how personal identity plays into how one has more or less power. Ending on a cautionary note, Li allows both sides of this debate to weigh in and reminds readers that protecting students is complex and calls into question who can define hate speech and censor that speech.
Leave a Reply