Hey wise one. This one is deep. I remember the first time you engaged me in conversation - it was about my emotions - something like the other side of fear is excitement. There's a lot to experience here and I hope you get to do lots of in-person workshops on taking educators and business folks through this.
Thanks Melanie! I actually am going to be incorporating this idea into a keynote at a university in DC in August and in a presentation to educators in Mexico in October. Tell your educator friends in SC in case they are interested too! Can't wait!
Hi Mike...this was a thought provoking post. It reminded me of Bridges Transition Model, but with more meat. It also reinforces the notion that resistance to change is the fear of loss. Which leads me to a question - In your opinion, what role does the "lizard brain" play in this process?
That's a really interesting question, Dan - thanks for asking.
First, I am not an expert in the concept of the lizard brain or the limbic system, so please take this with a grain of salt. But in the interest of discussion, I will venture a guess.
If the lizard brain connects to the idea of safety and security, then it would connect here to the idea that the "old way" represents safety and security. While the limbic system is more focused on physical danger (I think), it also sounds like it has evolved to perceive risks associated with our professions, our livelihood, our ability to support ourselves too - which indirectly threaten our physical safety -- but threaten it nonetheless. We perceive disruptive technology as taking the food off of our table -- which alerts the fight or flight instinct.
So, I would think that our evolution has taken the lizard brain past immediate physical danger and into a territory of indirect physical danger -- i.e. the idea of being fired and not being able to get a job. So - ipso facto with regard to AI -- we would fear adapting to a disruptive technology because we might not understand it or feel we have the capacity to understand it -- and therefore feel our livelihoods are being threatened by swift change and a need for new, difficult-to-ascertain skills.
I wouldn't know how to combat that -- except potentially to say to that person that the "new way" or the "new world" might not be as dangerous as our minds initially perceive. But even that feels shallow. Because, the AI world is in fact quite dangerous! It's dangerous in that it might remove your purpose as a human being if we automate everything. But with regards to jobs and putting food on the table, I do think new professions will sprout up out of this (like AI Literacy Trainer, my new job :) that will allow people to continue to survive.
So, it is dangerous, but not in the "it's going to kill my job" kind of way. So, the lizard brain would have to be assuaged with the idea that new jobs will sprout up -- and you can have them for yourself and continue to survive, but perhaps only if you develop AI Literacy...
That still has a feeling of "pushing a person's back against the wall," so I could see it being ineffective. You could perhaps pair this approach with a tinge of optimism as well, to make it more palatable.
Just spitballing here! Hope this wasn't too confusing. Thoughts?
To be fair, mine is less of a curriculum and more of a framework. It is a way to incorporate AI use into your assessments/PBL exercises so that students develop AI Literacy while still working within the confines of your traditional assessments.
To me, the best method for learning AI is a) close reading analysis of expert users b) models/demonstrations from teachers c) individual experimentation and practice and d) most importantly, feedback!
Most of the other AI Literacy curricula focus on reading articles about AI and discussing them. That's all good and well as a starting point, maybe - but you're not really developing AI Literacy that way. That's like saying that reading articles about baseball is going to turn you into a baseball player. It's a nice addendum, but nowhere close to the most effective approach.
I'm offering workshops and presentations through this fall to university faculties and K12 faculties. I am still building my website so have not fully launched, but I have a few clients so far including a University in Washington, DC. Part of my approach includes the ideas that teachers need to learn to play "baseball" first the right way before they can try and teach students how to "play" the right way. If you're a teacher with some AI Literacy though, you might be ready to experiment with this assessment framework.
With this, you don't need an entire curriculum devoted to AI -- though you do need to devote several days before and after the project or essay where you teach Effective AI Use, discuss it, and then reflect on it. I can explain more if needed!
Hey wise one. This one is deep. I remember the first time you engaged me in conversation - it was about my emotions - something like the other side of fear is excitement. There's a lot to experience here and I hope you get to do lots of in-person workshops on taking educators and business folks through this.
Thanks Melanie! I actually am going to be incorporating this idea into a keynote at a university in DC in August and in a presentation to educators in Mexico in October. Tell your educator friends in SC in case they are interested too! Can't wait!
Care to link the events so I can share?
Hi Mike...this was a thought provoking post. It reminded me of Bridges Transition Model, but with more meat. It also reinforces the notion that resistance to change is the fear of loss. Which leads me to a question - In your opinion, what role does the "lizard brain" play in this process?
That's a really interesting question, Dan - thanks for asking.
First, I am not an expert in the concept of the lizard brain or the limbic system, so please take this with a grain of salt. But in the interest of discussion, I will venture a guess.
If the lizard brain connects to the idea of safety and security, then it would connect here to the idea that the "old way" represents safety and security. While the limbic system is more focused on physical danger (I think), it also sounds like it has evolved to perceive risks associated with our professions, our livelihood, our ability to support ourselves too - which indirectly threaten our physical safety -- but threaten it nonetheless. We perceive disruptive technology as taking the food off of our table -- which alerts the fight or flight instinct.
So, I would think that our evolution has taken the lizard brain past immediate physical danger and into a territory of indirect physical danger -- i.e. the idea of being fired and not being able to get a job. So - ipso facto with regard to AI -- we would fear adapting to a disruptive technology because we might not understand it or feel we have the capacity to understand it -- and therefore feel our livelihoods are being threatened by swift change and a need for new, difficult-to-ascertain skills.
I wouldn't know how to combat that -- except potentially to say to that person that the "new way" or the "new world" might not be as dangerous as our minds initially perceive. But even that feels shallow. Because, the AI world is in fact quite dangerous! It's dangerous in that it might remove your purpose as a human being if we automate everything. But with regards to jobs and putting food on the table, I do think new professions will sprout up out of this (like AI Literacy Trainer, my new job :) that will allow people to continue to survive.
So, it is dangerous, but not in the "it's going to kill my job" kind of way. So, the lizard brain would have to be assuaged with the idea that new jobs will sprout up -- and you can have them for yourself and continue to survive, but perhaps only if you develop AI Literacy...
That still has a feeling of "pushing a person's back against the wall," so I could see it being ineffective. You could perhaps pair this approach with a tinge of optimism as well, to make it more palatable.
Just spitballing here! Hope this wasn't too confusing. Thoughts?
Thank you for your thoughtful response - great spitballing!
As an AI Literacy Trainer, has a K12 AI literacy curriculum been developed that you would recommend?
Yes, mine!
To be fair, mine is less of a curriculum and more of a framework. It is a way to incorporate AI use into your assessments/PBL exercises so that students develop AI Literacy while still working within the confines of your traditional assessments.
To me, the best method for learning AI is a) close reading analysis of expert users b) models/demonstrations from teachers c) individual experimentation and practice and d) most importantly, feedback!
Most of the other AI Literacy curricula focus on reading articles about AI and discussing them. That's all good and well as a starting point, maybe - but you're not really developing AI Literacy that way. That's like saying that reading articles about baseball is going to turn you into a baseball player. It's a nice addendum, but nowhere close to the most effective approach.
I'm offering workshops and presentations through this fall to university faculties and K12 faculties. I am still building my website so have not fully launched, but I have a few clients so far including a University in Washington, DC. Part of my approach includes the ideas that teachers need to learn to play "baseball" first the right way before they can try and teach students how to "play" the right way. If you're a teacher with some AI Literacy though, you might be ready to experiment with this assessment framework.
https://mikekentz.substack.com/p/a-new-assessment-design-framework
With this, you don't need an entire curriculum devoted to AI -- though you do need to devote several days before and after the project or essay where you teach Effective AI Use, discuss it, and then reflect on it. I can explain more if needed!
Your new assessment framework that you shared is exciting. I've already shared it with friends and on my LinkedIn account. 💯
Great! I am adapting this for adults. Stay tuned...