The future of learning

Artificial intelligence, standardized testing, and ESAs

We are sprinting into the age of artificial intelligence, causing people to question the very meaning of human learning. Schools across the nation have already embraced 1:1 technology and digital curriculum — now they must grapple with ChatGPT, a program that can write unique five-paragraph essays in a blink of an eye.

More changes are happening here in Arizona. Universal educational savings accounts (ESAs) are disrupting the delivery mechanism for publicly funded learning. Parents are using vouchers to subsidize private school tuition, or to pay for other public school alternatives.

To help our education system navigate this uncharted territory, the state of Arizona turns its eyes to Tom Horne.  

Tom Horne, the newly elected Superintendent of Public Instruction, age 77, ran a campaign of traditionalism. He wants tougher discipline in the classroom and he wants to produce higher scores on standardized tests. He wants to bring back the AIMS era by requiring a test — on top of existing tests — that must be passed as a condition of high school graduation. He opposes the encroachment of progressive ideology into school curriculum. 

The Superintendent is an administrator, not a policymaker. But the office brings with it a bully-pulpit and a strong lobbying arm, as well as a seat on the State Board of Education.

We elected a traditionalist Superintendent at a time of flux. We elected a Democratic Governor and a Republican-majority Legislature.

Maybe these contradictions will give us time to sort out some competing ideas about the future of learning.

---

If Tom Horne reads Twitter, he might see people saying things like this:

The author of this tweet happens to work in the AI industry, but you will hear the same ideas from people who aren’t financially invested in digital technology. 

In this case, I will defend traditional learning.  

“Learning how to learn” is a weird concept to me. We already have the capacity to learn.

A kid raised in a family of ranchers will learn the skills of ranching by observation, instruction, and practice.

I’m a city slicker. I don’t think any training other than “ranching” would equip me to become an effective rancher. Maybe a robot rancher could help with the training, but I don’t think taking classes on “learning how to learn” would help me in my ranching endeavor.

The question is the content of the learning. What should we learn?

Should we learn history? Science? Statistics? Algebra? Do we need to learn how to write?

Obviously, we can look up any fact about history on the internet. A student can plug in a math problem and receive an instant solution. ChatGPT can produce a technically adequate essay about any topic. I don’t think it could write a compelling biography, but it can perform a mind-boggling array of literary tasks which can be used for researching, outlining, or even writing a speech for a Congressman. 

Despite the awe of this new technology, my instinct is that traditional learning is still important for developing human minds. Life is full of judgment calls that are made using a combination of knowledge, logic, values, and emotions. What we do, how we live, how we vote — our actions are shaped by this combination of mental acuities, some rational but others not. Education, then, is not simply the downloading of information but a training in human knowledge for the purpose of developing citizens of the country, citizens of the world. The discovery of meaning: this will never be a task for a computer. 

For this reason, I still think it’s important for students to learn history and science, to get a taste of human art and literature, to get a working understanding of economics and statistics, and to learn how to write.

Boring classes (and bad tests) will use rote learning of facts and tasks, but good teachers (and good curriculum) will enrich student minds through an engaging experience with knowledge.

---

On the issue of measuring learning, we are stuck in the stone age. At least for public schools. Private schools don’t take state tests. 

Tom Horne and his fellow Republicans are devoted to standardized testing in the public schools, perhaps because they are suspicious that, without testing, public schools wouldn't be motivated to properly educate the youth. On the flip side, Republicans trust the marketplace to deliver intangible outcomes for ESA-recipients. Parental satisfaction is the ultimate barometer of student achievement (in private schools).

Democrats are suspicious of market forces in the education system. They warn of unscrupulous scammers. And besides, private schools don’t accept everyone. Public schools do. But Democrats seem fine with the standardized testing status quo. They demand “accountability” for ESA-receiving schools, meaning they want private schools to take the same tests as the public schools. 

One thing that bothers me about our standardized tests (besides the weirdly designed questions) is that they’re geared towards college admissions. I have nothing against aptitude tests for college admissions, and I fully support an education system where anybody, regardless of socio-economic circumstance, has the opportunity to attain higher learning. But unless we expect 100% of Arizona students to have the desire and aptitude for college academics, then we are using the wrong tests. 

Conor Friedersdorf, writer at The Atlantic, once made a great observation. He said he wasn’t against the idea of testing high school students for college aptitude, but what about testing for mechanical aptitude? Or fire-fighting aptitude? Or ranching aptitude?

Regarding a mandatory statewide test for high school graduation, the problem is where to set the bar and what questions to ask. In a state that celebrates school choice, in an educational environment that seeks to build a variety of gardens for student growth, it seems counterproductive to require the same test for all students.

You would think the “populist” Republicans would seek better solutions for the public schools. Right now they’re content to bash public schools for not producing higher test scores. The Arizona Freedom Caucus is threatening to withhold votes on raising the school spending cap unless unspecified “systemic reforms” are enacted.

We could use some political leadership to reconcile the testing issues, but systemic school reforms can’t happen overnight.

The spending cap needs to be lifted by March, with a two-thirds majority vote in both legislative chambers. Otherwise, public district schools will be forced to make huge budget cuts before the end of the year. This would cause teacher layoffs and possibly lead to school closures.

If public school students end up taking their state tests from home this year, watch for a massive increase in proficiency thanks to ChatGPT. 

---

Phoenix 

---

Links and News 

• The Dispatch wrote a great piece in their morning newsletter this week about the decreasing number of jobs that are requiring a college degree. Maryland and Pennsylvania both eliminated the four-year degree requirement for a wide swath of government jobs. The private sector is also moving in this direction. Former Maryland Governor Larry Hogan wrote an Op-Ed in the Wall Street Journal arguing that a college degree should signify an education, not just a credential. The number of people earning college degrees is higher than ever, although the rigor and significance of a liberal arts college education isn’t what it used to be. 

• Great Hearts, a classical-style public charter school network, is making plans to open a new set of private Christian schools in Arizona, capitalizing on universal ESAs.

• Natalie Wexler writes about the need to combine scientific research on learning with good curriculum that makes it easier for teachers to translate research into practice.

• The Bulwark: Phonics works—we’ve known that for decades. Are schools finally getting the message?

• Arizona Mirror: Teachers would get $60K minimum salary under bill in Congress making grants to states

• Netflix Recommendation: The Pez Outlaw. This is a super fun documentary about a quirky toy collector who goes toe-to-toe with Pez’s CEO in the 1990s.  

---