Capacity Building Educator

Education And Ai

One thing is certain in the artificial intelligence (AI) and augmented intelligence (IA) age, pedagogical theory and action are under siege. Pressure to keep up with everyday life and changes in the street is mounting at school and university gates. Once the cloistered spaces for learning, education institutions can no longer shut the doors on outsiders. Technology and the Internet are the backdrop of everything happening in global transactions. In the post-pandemic world both teacher and student have entered a different life and need to renegotiate the pedagogical canon. Blocking invasive kinds of software and mobile internet linked devices from educational settings seems pointless and time wasting. How to manage the evolving AI world within some kind of controlled setting is the reality point. The ‘problem’ is not going away nor is it easily fixed. How to juxtapose educational curriculums on this connected global landscape is the dilemma. Undeniably the AI dynamic makes life difficult for educators. Open mindedness and acceptance of change can be a scary phenomenon and facing this evolving force requires courage and conviction. Regardless of position, ideas must be the starting point.

With the issues noted as the backdrop the aim of this chapter is to drill down into the relationship between teacher and student. The starting point could be a round table discussion conducted in multiple settings. The place could be a school, university, or training college. It doesn’t matter as the issues will be similar. Taking a drone’s view of the various groups and recording their conversations will likely reveal a process. Speculatively speaking several steps will be noted. First, assertive voices will attempt to establish their turf and its priority in any outcome. Second, after coffee and some heated discussion there may emerge a more conciliatory approach and willingness to consider alternative views. Third, having grasped the options the group members may move to a more cooperative phase and attempt to find consensus. Fourth, having reached consensus the next step is to design a plan of action. Fifth, the group agrees to implement the plan and meet regularly to review and adjust as needed. What these steps describe Etienne Wenger (1999) terms developing a community of practice (see Figure 1). Implicit in this process is consensus as a mandatory driver for effective and sustainable change. The process is dynamic, pragmatic and helps shift intransigent thinking. Bonds formed can scaffold the teachers’ need for support during a period of what are acknowledged monumental changes within the profession.

Figure 1.

Developing a community of practice

AI might be the post pandemic attention grabber. However, navigating the learning terrain has multiple hazards and turning points. The curriculum is the likely to head the list. Written by experts and the product of numerous committees and policy makers, curriculums generally appear as non-negotiable dictates for the teaching and learning content. In most countries schooling for children is compulsory. The culminating hurdle will be some form of external assessment, the outcome of which can determine the next life steps for the student. Considering how to meet the curriculum requirements and attempt to incorporate elements of the digital age is all the more reason for institutions to encourage communities of practice. Colleagues can share their expertise, collaboratively negotiate, and implement changes. Through this process capacity building takes place. There is a mechanism in place for focussing on external forces such as AI. This builds confidence and the basis for a future pedagogy.