This is great, Mike. The many parallels keep coming at us. We appreciate your continuing in the core pattern of grading--humanly--the chats.
I have been working on an analogy/thesis/historical pattern that's similar, and as an English teacher, you'd get it right away: fiction was our best AI before we had AI, for dealing with complex information that mattered. Interpreting fiction became an essential skill to teach for that reason. And now...
The students have a deeper, long term point neglected in this proposal. The work here is similar to the Active learning of Physics education at University of Colorado, Boulder, Dr. Carl Wieman, Nobel winner and driver of PhET. Imagine his chagrin when we showed him Genesis at Chalmers University.
I helped a few AI patents on the abductive reasoning software developed in Oxford and applied at Chalmers. Nearly all the reasoning work students are doing on AI throughout science will be done through software.
Today, they use Kolmogorov math and Shannon entropy (LLMs are skipped as junk).
There are over 20 computational reasoning forms on the horizon.
Perhaps one question to consider is how we advance the human mind and spirit when machines run things? This the question raised by Dr. Carl Wieman's grandfather, Henry, in 1968. Henry Nelson Wieman was a comparative topic of Martin Luther King Jr's doctotoral dissertation.
Like the analogy. I agree employers need a better literacy framework. I think crucial too is being able to continue to become more fluent rather than a hard standard.
This is great, Mike. The many parallels keep coming at us. We appreciate your continuing in the core pattern of grading--humanly--the chats.
I have been working on an analogy/thesis/historical pattern that's similar, and as an English teacher, you'd get it right away: fiction was our best AI before we had AI, for dealing with complex information that mattered. Interpreting fiction became an essential skill to teach for that reason. And now...
Paul Erb
Excellent work, I’ve been thinking a lot about AI literacy and you gave me even more perspective.
Thank you for the mention. How very kind of you.
The students have a deeper, long term point neglected in this proposal. The work here is similar to the Active learning of Physics education at University of Colorado, Boulder, Dr. Carl Wieman, Nobel winner and driver of PhET. Imagine his chagrin when we showed him Genesis at Chalmers University.
I helped a few AI patents on the abductive reasoning software developed in Oxford and applied at Chalmers. Nearly all the reasoning work students are doing on AI throughout science will be done through software.
Today, they use Kolmogorov math and Shannon entropy (LLMs are skipped as junk).
There are over 20 computational reasoning forms on the horizon.
Perhaps one question to consider is how we advance the human mind and spirit when machines run things? This the question raised by Dr. Carl Wieman's grandfather, Henry, in 1968. Henry Nelson Wieman was a comparative topic of Martin Luther King Jr's doctotoral dissertation.
Kind Regards,
David Fleming
Visiting Scholar
Like the analogy. I agree employers need a better literacy framework. I think crucial too is being able to continue to become more fluent rather than a hard standard.