I think doing that well is boundto require us to find ways to engage with these tools and find both their affordances and their limitations as learning tools.
I think doing that well is boundto require us to find ways to engage with these tools and find both their affordances and their limitations as learning tools.
Maybe? But I'm also reminded of things like Wikipedia...the educational stance towards it was "don't, it may do more harm than good" for quite awhile. It's still not generally integrated into teaching despite it being the largest known repository of human knowledge (that's actually pretty reliable)
That kind of "ban" didn't stop students using it, of course, but it did mean they did so with some caution. I think uncritically endorsing AI just because they may or may not use it anyway is an odd stance for a group that's supposed to be on board with critical thinking.
Noone said anything about endorsing or uncritically.
That's my read of the original quoted thread.