Teachers using AI for so many tasks (secondary school)

[inneedofteaandbiccies]

Was wondering what people think of secondary teachers using AI for presentations (Powerpoint style), worksheets, tasks (such as written tasks - information provided created by AI, history info sheets, history image creation for presentations, even Art department posters or example worksheets for art lessons etc using generated AI example images.

What do others think about this? Whilst I understand teachers only have limited time available, they managed without until a year or two ago, and my year 9 child is moaning about the excessive use and to be honest I am inclined to agree that it's not appropriate in all instances.

Just interested if you think this should be a part of school to such an extent that it's everywhere (just a state school, by the way!).

Well, as I said above, there are some circumstances where I think it's ok and others where it's not. It's an opinion, you can agree or disagree.

I'm all for AI if it helps teachers to get their spelling, punctuation and grammar right.

But that’s not an Ai specific problem is it, that’s all teaching in any format

Nah. You're just looking for an excuse to have a pop at teachers with zero comprehension of our schemes of work, exam specifications, marking and feedback expectations and assessment requirements. The 'right approach' is so massively variable - year on year, class to class, timing of individual lessons, individual personalities and how they rub along (or not) with others. We are the ones to say what is right, right now.

AI has revolutionised my planning. It throws up shit I would never have considered, despite 20 plus successful years in a classroom. All you need to know is my exam results remain above national average in an area of significant deprivation.

I think you missed the sarcasm in my post....

Perhaps re-read my OP and previous posts rather than immediately branding me a "Luddite".

As I clearly said above more than once, I think it's ok sometimes, and not ok other times. And I gave several examples. You're free to disagree if you want to.

What I do think is a shame is encouraging children to be creative yet providing them with examples of what are the very opposite of creativity, e.g. art made by AI. To me, it feels defeatist and ironic.

I fully get its usefulness for certain tasks.

If I were a teacher I'd definitely be using AI. I can only imagine how useful it could be for lesson planning and making resources. The students would be none the wiser though because I know how to use it...everything would be fact checked and there'd be no slop graphics.

Anybody who isn't by now leveraging AI to make their job easier is a fool imo.

I gave specific examples of where I didn't think it was appropriate. I even admitted that I thought it was useful sometimes.

I didn't say "don't use it for planning" or "never use it at all, it's all bad" yet despite the clear posts above you seem completely triggered and projecting that onto me.

I don't have an issue with your planning or whatever.

I'd suggest you re-read so you can understand my concerns about its use in art, for example. But instead you prefer to demonise me as "against all teachers" for having a (nuanced) opinion. That doesn't seem very sensible or evidence based.

Just to add balance, at my school we are very much discouraged from using it (it’s seen as unprofessional and unethical) and the students are not allowed to use it. I wouldn’t be impressed if I were your daughter either.

That's so refreshing and I hope more schools take this approach. I totally understand what people are saying about a sheer lack of time. But for me and my children, I have serious concerns about removing original thought and the power of the mind from an environment that is supposed to make those things blossom.

About the same as when they copied and pasted wiki (that they hadn't even bothered to take the hyperlinks out of), or handedin/uploaded blank documents that teachers had to waste time trying to open.

But that would mean that posters would have to consider lazy pupils and parents instead of just having a go at teachers.

It’s in its infancy right now.

It will get a lot better. And it will be absolutely everywhere, like the internet.

Better get used to it. You are fighting a losing battle.

Yet another person who hasn't bothered to read or understand my opinion properly.

Except I’m not having a go at teachers if you bothered to read my posts.

Only the most lazy students would use unedited wiki links but everyone uses AI.

Stop focusing on the teacher's resources and focus instead on what your child is learning. Are they making progress with these resources? If so, there's no issue.

Would you also complain if the teacher used a textbook that they didn't write themselves?

How much original thought do you think goes on in schools? Teachers have to teach set content from a curriculum, none of which will be their original thought. And so there's not going to be much scope for original thought in the kids either. Whether or not a teacher has used AI to make some slides quicker or whatever isn't going to make a blind bit of difference.

Oh yeah that seems pretty rubbish. Well I guess are they examples of work to emulate or examples of what that time period may have looked like...? I can see a use for those.

I would love to know how to use it better, I tried and it was awful. My husband uses it a lot for work (non education) though and it's definitely got good uses but you need to prompt it right. I just find it way faster currently to make my own and/or reuse colleague's resources. I tweak where I need and want to but I'd do that with something AI generated anyway.

My friend is a teacher and the other day, another teacher at his school presented slides on the topic they were going to write about, which was "someone you find inspiring from history".

The next day, he came in to a barrage of complaints... Apparently having used AI to create a title slide with "a collage of images of famous people from history", the inspirational figures presented to the children included Hitler, Genghis Khan, Stalin and Donald Trump.

So yeah, maybe fine to use AI (apparently the slides looked great at first glance) but you do maybe have to use your brain as well.

Yet again you haven't bothered to read my examples.

So you think children should be presented with examples of AI art for inspiration / consideration when being set an artistic piece of classwork?

Why would I think that?

I wasn't responding to you anyway

Sorry this is just wrong.

The amazing power of the teacher is their communication. That is entirely original. If you get a good teacher it is amazing - generic AI resources are the opposite of an individual putting in their own efforts to communicate.

Plus kids feel the effort level of teachers and there's research showing that's a big factor in student engagement.

I teach a subject that only appears as an exam subject so while there are certainly opportunities to be creative, for me AI is most useful to help me link carefully to the curriculum including when I am being creative. You can ask a gen AI tool "how can you link X concept to Y type of resource" and you get useful ideas back, some of which you would never have thought of.

I have quite a lot of syllabus discussions with gen AI. I know they're only digests of what others have said but it "knows" a lot more suitable others than me!

Perhaps we've interpreted "original thought" differently, because to me that's distinct from how a teacher communicates.

Using AI to whip up a PowerPoint in seconds rather than trudging through making it oneself isn't going to remove a good communicator's ability to inspire their class.

The problem with these discussions is that the people who are anti AI don't understand how it could be used, and so they automatically assume it would be generic, incorrect etc.

I'm a teacher @inneedofteaandbiccies and think a lot of teachers have been ridiculously defensive on this thread!

I'm infuriated by the amount of posters my school are currently using that are AI generated (competitions, engagement etc). We have graphics students who could design these much better. I'm with your son that it's cringe, because it's the same AI slop that is all over Facebook advertising charity days out, window cleaning etc.

I have used AI in the past to generate model examples. I could do it better, but it taking me fifteen minutes to read, check and edit versus an hour and a half is too tempting a time saver. I don't use it all the time though.

I've also seen it used badly- we teach an unusual trio of texts at GCSE, and the headteacher (!) was teaching some Year 11s and AI had made up the quotations for one of the texts!

So i don't think AI will replace teachers in the same way as other jobs (teenagers 😆) but I do think teachers need to be careful with it.

Also, it should be nowhere near creativity, and definitely near pointless admin tasks that get my line manager off my back 🙈

ETA- any grammatical errors are mine, and it's because I'm nursing a newborn so chronically sleep deprived!

I can't understand why you wouldn't use AI.

People proudly saying they never use it reminds me of the comments people made when the internet became a thing or when mobile phones were invented. If you go back far enough many people were very negative about novels too.

It helps in many ways. Helps sort my emails so I can instantly see those that need immediate attention. Can easily generate text for a comprehension exercise something my school is very focused on. Lots of practice questions easily produced which is another focus. I've used it to produce games to teach different concepts which would normally take me so long that I wouldn't bother.

I don't rate it for producing images for teaching but have used it personally for mocking up rooms prior to decorating. I have also used it to generate comments for cards or similar. I don't copy them verbatim but it gives me a starting point.

I honestly think it's amazing and really does help especially in those moments where I need to get work done but my brain is a little fried.

If you read the OP it's not saying blanket "don't use it", but using it for everything and for specific examples (such as creative project work e.g. art posters, AI generated art examples) it defeats the purpose.

You can't teach creativity or set a good example, or expect kids to come up with original ideas if the very source materials are the opposite of creative e.g. AI generated. It's embarrassing.

Yes! Someone who finally gets and understands my beef with it!

I especially agree with the posters thing. I love your idea of getting the kids to design the posters instead.

I worry about the consequences of surrounding kids with AI generated slop posters (most of them are ugly, generic crap) and expecting them not to be affected even surreptitiously. And in an art department? It normalises shutting off and outsourcing your creativity, and lowers the standards and homogenises expected norms. When an art department is meant to be the opposite of that.

Thank you, and hope you manage to fit in some sleep!