Technology

It's just online school. If you don't answer the questions you can't go to the next sections. If you don't progress you wouldn't pass. If you don't pass school you get held back.. Parents who work wouldn't sign their kids up for online school as they would get arrested for leaving their kids home alone. Some kids do well in it, a lot don't. The kids that do well in it will get ahead quickly. Likely could finish a year early for those 4 years. Is that good? Debatable.. but these things existed before this "slap the name AI on it" craze started. I knew some kids that were doing it in 2018 because hurricane Michael destroyed their school. And then many switched to it when covid started. Nothing really sounds any different here other than the AI being labeled on it.

When I was in school, someone figured out that if you go into Google Translate and type in a link, you could go to whatever website you wanted. We also figured out that despite Google Images being blocked, you could just click on the images tab of Google search and use it that way. Even the teachers told us about that one lol.

At that age I figured out that I could bypass the policy restrictions on my computer by unplugging the Ethernet cable right after login. Gave me full local admin.

A year or so prior to that I figured out that if you viewed IE's temporary internet files and just backspaced your way up, you can access the otherwise restricted C:, where I found other kids had already installed games onto.

No way this works for a full school year.

"bobs and vagene, please"

As a former elementary school teacher, I fully agree. IXL is decent for skill reinforcement but falls short when it comes to teaching new content and principles. It turns out most students benefit from learning in a group where another student might not get the content initially and ask clarifying questions and have the teacher repeat, rephrase, and reteach. Or classmates work in pairs or small groups and teach each other, for example. IXL was great for practice and did allow the teacher additional flexibility to work with students who needed more help or a more personalized approach, but I would not want my students to exclusively use it.

Theoretically, by analysing the exact needs, and being able to address them individually (in contrast to a teacher, who has limited time, and a whole class of students to attend to), it could do a better job. I mean the whole sales pitch of these systems is that they can attend to individual needs, and not just give you the material made for the average, "regular" student.

We'll see if it turns out that way. I have my doubts. It needs to have training data about neuro-divergent students, and knowledge how to handle them. And usually AI reproduces bias and stereotypes. Edge-cases are more rare in the training data, and that makes AI less knowledgeable. And that happens a lot. Plus current AI is very limited. I'm not sure if it's even smart enough to address individual needs. Or feed students with proper facts instead of fiction.

But I don't think analysing the students behaviour is the issue here. If at all, it's going to lead to improvements of those AI models, if they collect data about neuro-divergent people and feed them in.

Atypical kids being left behind is a feature, not a bug. There's a shocking amount of parents even in the year of our Lord 2024 who think we're "too much" of a drain on schooling.

I'm sure their privacy policy will heavily favor the students personal rights and that their backend database will be hackproof...