Garth Nichols

Endurheimt mennskunnar í gervigreindardrifnum heimi

"How might generative AI be shaping us? How might we shape our use of and the development of generative AI?”

— Garth Nichols

Um fyrirlesturinn

Höfðu Lúdditarnir rétt fyrir sér? Barátta þeirra snerist ekki um andstöðu við tækni, heldur vörn fyrir mennskunni. Heimspekingurinn Marshall McLuhan sagði: „Við mótum verkfærin og síðan móta verkfærin okkur.“ Í þessu erindi spyr Garth Nichols hvort við séum að endurtaka mistökin frá dögum samfélagsmiðlanna og hvernig við getum tekið stjórnina á innleiðingu gervigreindar. Með dæmum úr sögunni og skólastarfi dagsins í dag teiknar hann upp sýn á framtíð þar sem gervigreindin er þjónn okkar, en ekki húsbóndi.

Hver er Garth Nichols

Garth Nichols er skólastjóri Kingsway College School í Toronto og einn af stofnendum Cohort 21, sem er þekktur vettvangur fyrir starfsþróun kennara um nýsköpun og breytingar í skólastarfi. Hann er jafnframt sérfræðingur við framhaldsmenntunardeild OISE við Háskólann í Toronto og situr í stjórn ISEEN (Independent Schools Experiential Education Network). Garth er leiðandi talsmaður þess að flétta saman mennsku, upplifunarnám og gervigreind og miðlar þekkingu sinni til skólafólks víða um heim í gegnum hlaðvarpið Lassoing Leadership. Garth er þekktur sögumaður og hugsuður sem hvetur skólasamfélagið til að spyrja gagnrýninna spurninga um hver eigi að móta hvern í tæknivæddum heimi og hvernig við tryggjum að nemendur séu ávallt í fyrsta sæti.

Spurningar og svör frá Sli.Do

How can a teacher tell whether AI is helping a student think or doing the thinking for them?

  • There is an increasingly prominent concept in modern educational discourse known as "Why-Bother-ism"—the mindset wherein students question the necessity of engaging in cognitive effort if generative AI can perform the task on their behalf. Consequently, our primary responsibility as educators is to clearly define the specific critical thinking and analytical skills we aim to cultivate, and intentionally design learning pathways backwards from those core objectives.

  • With this framework in mind, educators can evaluate whether AI is truly serving as a cognitive scaffold through targeted observation of student workflows, authentic product creation, and visible thinking routines in non-technological settings. These observations can then be paired with direct learning conversations to effectively triangulate student comprehension and practical application.

  • From a pedagogical standpoint, requiring students to apply their understanding to novel, real-time scenarios serves as a highly effective approach to constructively evaluate authentic student learning and high-order reasoning.

How can we help the students understand the importance of using their own mind, not simply throwing everything into an AI chat bot because it's easier?

  • Authentic Role Modeling: Demonstrating and emphasizing that independent critical thinking and personal reflection are fundamental to the human learning experience.

  • Cultivating AI Literacy: Teaching students how algorithmic models generate responses, highlighting that AI outputs are inherently subject to bias, inaccuracy, and the limitations of their training data.

    • Specifically, a "limited data set" refers to AI's inability to replicate authentic human experience—including emotional nuance, deep interpersonal connection, and lived experience, which cannot be captured by text alone.

  • Fostering Collaborative Engagement: Encouraging students to connect deeply with one another through active learning strategies, such as structured debates, real-world case studies, and problem-based tasks that address issues directly relevant to their lives.

How much AI use should we allow, and when should we step in and stop the students? Or is that just old-fashioned thinking on our part?

  • A single prescriptive answer cannot be applied universally, as the appropriate level of AI integration depends significantly on several contextual factors:

    • Age

    • Developmental Readiness and Age Group

    • Academic Discipline and Specific Learning Outcomes

    • Educator Familiarity and Technical Fluency with AI Tools

    • Institutional Policy and Equitable Access to Generative AI Platforms

  • Ultimately, educators must proactive take ownership of the technology adoption curve. Teachers should leverage their professional agency to strategically define which cognitive processes students must perform independently and where AI assistance is pedagogically appropriate.

Can we safeguard our humanity when society's demand is always to produce faster and create more value?

  • Yes, safeguarding our humanity is achievable, but it requires a sustained, collective effort across educational communities to build momentum and establish meaningful boundaries.

  • I strongly recommend exploring the research of Beck Tench at Harvard Project Zero and the Center for Digital Thriving, whose work provides valuable insights into balancing digital engagement with human well-being.