AI Response

 My personal relationship with AI is that I don't have one. I'm a never AI person. 

Here's a screenshot from my google history from today:

I avoid AI at all costs and find myself judging others for using it. I hate that AI has become unavoidable. 

I have three main reasons I am against AI: The climate, theft, and our human spirit. 

AI data centers are terrible for our environment and are taking the place of parks and homes. They use millions of gallons of water per day. The article I linked also describes how everyday people are paying higher energy bills, while the wealthy making these AI centers are profiting in a huge way. 

Secondly, AI steals from work made by humans, often creators and artists. I believe that this theft is simply unethical. Artists and creatives should be paid for their work. Full stop. This peer-reviewed article explains how AI is theft. 

Finally, I believe that using AI takes the soul out of us, especially when we use it for creative pursuits. To be human is to engage in thinking and be present in the world. A machine cannot make something a human can. A machine cannot make something that reflects your personal experience. It cannot make something with heart. 

Teaching is a profession that requires your heart and soul. I feel it would be unfair to my students to deny them my heart. 

While reading the Ferlazzo article, I found myself literally making a face, especially when I read the phrase "creativity isn't limited to master artists". I found this phrasing to be very problematic when it comes to AI. Creativity has never BEEN limited to master artists. We are creative every day in our own unique ways. We don't need a machine to make stolen art for us. Maybe our art isn't perfect, but isn't that what makes it ours?

I resonated much more with the Gallant and Rettinger reading. I particularly enjoyed the quote, "Every time educators help a student learn authentically, that student will contribute to the beliefs of peers and potentially influence their behavior toward integrity." (23) I saw a connection here with what we talked about re: Pierson and the importance of building relationships with students. My goal as teacher is to build within students an appreciation for the process of learning, not just the end result. In my opinion, using AI takes the joy and humanity out of that process. 

Prensky and Spiegel Response

I find myself aligning much more with Spiegel's beliefs than with Prensky's. Yes, children now grow up surrounded by technology, but (exactly as Spiegel says) we cannot assume, as Prensky does, that they know how to use this technology safely, respectfully, and in a manner that advances their critical thinking and learning. Not all students have the same modeling at home about how to engage with technology. I believe that as educators we have the responsibility to teach about technology before we teach with technology. 

This is how I view these steps:

We have to value what students know and  introduce them to something new when we teach them about technology. Books themselves are a new version of tech that students may engage with. We start there and then we broaden, with safety and rules that not all children have at home. Spiegel believes that we cannot categorize people by when they were born, like Prensky does, but rather how they use technology. I agree that this terminology is much more accurate as everyone born in the same generation has deeply unique experiences. I hear Prensky saying that all youth have the same experience with technology, while Spiegel makes room for varied levels of experience and knowledge. I especially resonated with how Spiegel used the word navigate. Rather than dictating what students must do, we guide them and help them to navigate using technology in an educational manner. While Prensky emphasizes using mostly technology in classrooms, Spiegel acknowledges the value of using both traditional and new technology, such as books and computers. I believe that digital native is an out-dated term because it assumes a similar experience of an entire generation. While I agree that generations have some experiences in common, we cannot assume that a generation is a monolith, especially as we all have differences between our uses of technology that might correlate with where we grew up, our socio-economic class, the religion that we were raised in, and many other factors. I tend to disagree with terms that I feel to be generalizations of a very broad experience, and I feel that digital native tends to serve to generalize an entire generation, which makes it much more difficult for teachers to go in with a mindset of meeting a set of extremely varied needs. 

I also feel compelled to include a link to the presentation that I use to teach my students basic internet safety during school when we are just starting to introduce it to them!

https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1y3cEwem2SSSgsydsrRGr3eWQ5ycZ736zQBKEnk8YeWY/edit?usp=sharing

Introduction

 Hi! My name is Daniel (she/her). I work at the Segue Institute for Learning as a kindergarten literacy teacher. I love to read and listen to ALL types of music, especially classic rock. I went to Hamilton College where I majored in French and Government, focusing on anti-colonial theory and literature. I am also a member of Teach for America and I have a cat named Disco :)

Below are some pictures of my cat and people that are important to me <3