Thanks for the perspective across the pond. One of the main objectives of this piece is the prompt reactions like your own. I personally am searching for the best way to guide schools through this opportunity/challenge.
Ok so I am Innovation lead & Head of English in an 11-18 UK Google workspace school. We have broken up for the summer already.
Couple of points to note
1. We simply do not have to switch it on for pupils and we just won’t until we have our heads around it.
2. The timing is actually perfect for us. It gives me 7 weeks over the summer to figure it out, think & reflect, & then give options to staff.
3. Teachers (here anyway, don’t know about the US?) are pretty resistant to change. We have the best interests of our pupils foremost, and a robustly cynical attitude on the whole. Unlike Hilary & Tensing, in the face of their mountain, we will rarely do anything just “because it’s there”.
4. Let’s not underestimate how glacially slow changes in teaching practices are. Some are still stuck on pre-internet worksheets. Yes, really.
5. In the UK, exams are still handwritten so a LOT of classwork is fully analogue.
None of which is to say that we will not adopt any of the shiny new tools; we will - but at our stubborn do-not-tell-me-what-to-do-Sundar-Sam-‘n’all pace.
Maybe it’s different over the pond but over here, “Keep calm and carry on” is still the (often quite annoying) mantra 😅
Thank you for your insights into the future implications of big tech on the AI startups. I work daily with both Magic School and School AI. I personally use both and train teachers in these and other AI technologies in several districts. I love both products and they both offer unique options, especially in student use options. I was on Google classroom when the AI drop happened in the middle of summer school. But after exploring what is currently available, I am going to continue to use the 3rd party products myself and in my trainings. The options on GC are barely more than trained gems. I already have gems and GPTs trained specifically for my lesson planning style and that include our district and school wide specific practices and guidelines. The only specialized template for lesson plans GC offers is the 5E.
I also agree that the safety and privacy issues are a concern as well as the lack of oversight. I often utilize the features in Magic school and especially School AI that allow me to see a students entire conversation with an AI bot that I specifically create for a purpose related to the work we are doing. It also flags anything that potentially can be of concern. Although our district has flags for certain trigger words that students may search on their school devices, there is no human checking on the regular unless something gets flagged.
Giving students under 13 can potentially have access to Gemini directly without much oversight is unsettling.
Is this right? Google just integrated AI into Google Classroom with no notice? Thats is ... significant. Will be very interesting to see how this plays out. Thanks for the heads up!
Thank you for spotlighting these topics, Nick. "Google's decision to extend Gemini access to students under 13 is a significant reversal... as well as the potential FERPA implications that are not satisfactorily clarified in their 18-month default retention policy for chat histories." Lots of scrutiny needed here!
Top content here Nick. Glad to have you as a voice working into these choices - so how does a startup work in 2025 for ed tech, right? Find a need, fill the need with a well designed product - avoid scope creep, build base, amplify success, manage setbacks with positive pr...and then get bought out by Google? Thinking of this from last February's federal eo about innovation and removing barriers, and looking ahead to what you wrote here as a possible resource for a classroom activity in the AI and Ethics class: create a startup ed-tech tool to serve a specific need within your experience as a student, create then a business plan and compare through multiple LLM's to project best steps for growing your company, best steps to maximize profits compared to sustaining growth and retaining company control. What about the educator and student is improved throughout the process? What challenges might be overlooked for the educator and student because the ed tech company is, at its core, a for-profit business? Good ethical questions here, lots of language choice to study.
Thanks, Scott. Yes, lots of questions and concerns to work through. This will definitely push things forward. It may amplify resentment, given the over the summer-know one is looking-nature of the push.
Thanks for the first hand experience. I will take your insights with me as I continue to work with districts.
Thanks for the perspective across the pond. One of the main objectives of this piece is the prompt reactions like your own. I personally am searching for the best way to guide schools through this opportunity/challenge.
Ok so I am Innovation lead & Head of English in an 11-18 UK Google workspace school. We have broken up for the summer already.
Couple of points to note
1. We simply do not have to switch it on for pupils and we just won’t until we have our heads around it.
2. The timing is actually perfect for us. It gives me 7 weeks over the summer to figure it out, think & reflect, & then give options to staff.
3. Teachers (here anyway, don’t know about the US?) are pretty resistant to change. We have the best interests of our pupils foremost, and a robustly cynical attitude on the whole. Unlike Hilary & Tensing, in the face of their mountain, we will rarely do anything just “because it’s there”.
4. Let’s not underestimate how glacially slow changes in teaching practices are. Some are still stuck on pre-internet worksheets. Yes, really.
5. In the UK, exams are still handwritten so a LOT of classwork is fully analogue.
None of which is to say that we will not adopt any of the shiny new tools; we will - but at our stubborn do-not-tell-me-what-to-do-Sundar-Sam-‘n’all pace.
Maybe it’s different over the pond but over here, “Keep calm and carry on” is still the (often quite annoying) mantra 😅
Thank you for your insights into the future implications of big tech on the AI startups. I work daily with both Magic School and School AI. I personally use both and train teachers in these and other AI technologies in several districts. I love both products and they both offer unique options, especially in student use options. I was on Google classroom when the AI drop happened in the middle of summer school. But after exploring what is currently available, I am going to continue to use the 3rd party products myself and in my trainings. The options on GC are barely more than trained gems. I already have gems and GPTs trained specifically for my lesson planning style and that include our district and school wide specific practices and guidelines. The only specialized template for lesson plans GC offers is the 5E.
I also agree that the safety and privacy issues are a concern as well as the lack of oversight. I often utilize the features in Magic school and especially School AI that allow me to see a students entire conversation with an AI bot that I specifically create for a purpose related to the work we are doing. It also flags anything that potentially can be of concern. Although our district has flags for certain trigger words that students may search on their school devices, there is no human checking on the regular unless something gets flagged.
Giving students under 13 can potentially have access to Gemini directly without much oversight is unsettling.
Is this right? Google just integrated AI into Google Classroom with no notice? Thats is ... significant. Will be very interesting to see how this plays out. Thanks for the heads up!
Thank you for spotlighting these topics, Nick. "Google's decision to extend Gemini access to students under 13 is a significant reversal... as well as the potential FERPA implications that are not satisfactorily clarified in their 18-month default retention policy for chat histories." Lots of scrutiny needed here!
Top content here Nick. Glad to have you as a voice working into these choices - so how does a startup work in 2025 for ed tech, right? Find a need, fill the need with a well designed product - avoid scope creep, build base, amplify success, manage setbacks with positive pr...and then get bought out by Google? Thinking of this from last February's federal eo about innovation and removing barriers, and looking ahead to what you wrote here as a possible resource for a classroom activity in the AI and Ethics class: create a startup ed-tech tool to serve a specific need within your experience as a student, create then a business plan and compare through multiple LLM's to project best steps for growing your company, best steps to maximize profits compared to sustaining growth and retaining company control. What about the educator and student is improved throughout the process? What challenges might be overlooked for the educator and student because the ed tech company is, at its core, a for-profit business? Good ethical questions here, lots of language choice to study.
Thanks, Scott. Yes, lots of questions and concerns to work through. This will definitely push things forward. It may amplify resentment, given the over the summer-know one is looking-nature of the push.
Yes, big news. Sneak attack!