The Gondola Incident

I was very lucky to recently be invited to speak at the FutureShots conference in Venice at the amazing H-Farm campus, following on from a session working with IT staff in Cardiff, so it was a busy week to say the least.   It was great to meet up with my Digital Futures Group (DFG) colleagues, Gemma and Emma and a variety of others. It also presented its challenges but in doing so also presented a fair few new memories and learning opportunities.  Now I will be blogging further on the FutureShots conference however before doing so would first like to spend a bit of time sharing some of the more human-focused events and experiences from my trip to Venice.  And it was definitely an experience!

Now my trip out to Venice was unusually straightforward by my standards, arriving late on the Wednesday to the amazing H-Farm campus, although my first impressions were somewhat limited by darkness and the lateness of the hour.    I was quickly whisked off to a dinner which to me highlighted the strength in the H-Farm setup, with educationalists, H-Farm staff and technology startups all working and sharing as we ate.  My thanks to the very friendly people involved in helping me navigate the Italian menu when my Italian only stretched to a handful of words.

The conference itself was very interesting indeed with AI for education on day 1 and AI for business on day 2 however I will blog more on this in future.

So now onto some of the experiences;   Lets start with myself and Gemma Gwilliam deciding to try and find somewhere nice to eat, leading us on an exploratory tour of the site and surrounding area, and attempts to get an Uber or blag a lift with someone.   The efforts failed and the evening was progressing quickly without us having had dinner.   But then a gentleman in a car, heading out of the site suggested we head back and that there was an event on where people could help.   Little did we know that as we turned to head in the direction suggested, following the music, he had actually phoned ahead to tell people to expect us, and so it was as we followed the sound of music we were met by the most friendly and helpful bunch of people I have met in a long time.  I note, I remember Scottish Hogmanay’s where I would simply wander the streets following the music in search of a party, however, it has been a long time since I have done similar.   And so it was that myself and Gemma were welcomed by a lovely bunch of people we had never met before, sharing thoughts, sharing food and drink, and a little bit of karaoke. They were our saviours and such a lovely, warm, welcome and friendly bunch of people.

Queue learning point one;   We are often so busy in life that we rush from one task to another, however, the search for food led me to slow down and to meet people which otherwise I would likely never have met.   We made new connections and friends, and I suspect I am all the better for it, but it wouldn’t have happened aside from our search for food leaving us open to unexpected and unplanned connections.   I note the openness of the people we met, the people running the Maize strategic design company, also played a key part in this.   It turns out the Maize magazine, which they produce, had a lot of things in it with peeked my interest, so I look forward to reading the two editions our new friends provided me with.     

We also made another new friend when a large black beetle seemed to fly or drop from nowhere directly into a pizza box where it proceeded to attempt to make off with a pizza slice;  Not sure what the learning point is there however it might simply be to expect the unexpected.

Now let’s fast forward to day two of the event, and finding some time in the early evening to explore a little of what Venice has to offer.    Emma Darcy had joined myself and Gemma for day two and had suggested a “gentle” Gondola ride.   I was a little anxious as I cannot swim and have a fear of open water however I said I was willing to give it a go.    After some exploring we found ourselves at a dock waiting on a short gondola ride, a good thing, but across the Grand Canal a very busy waterway with some big boats, a less than good thing!    Now as I waited for the gondola to arrive my fear and anxiety grew;  I suspect if you visit the same dock you will see my hand impression on the wooden poles which rise from the canal and are used to anchor boats.   My grip on those poles as I waited was firm to say the least.   I was very close to leaving Gemma and Emma, the two attempting to murder me through either drowning or anxiety-induced heart attack, however I boarded the Gondola gingerly.    God did it rock back and forth, not exactly helping my anxiety.    And so as we crossed the busy waterway ever boat captain with a big boat decided to simultaneously descend on the waterway in an effort to capsize the craft I was in.  The wake of each craft causing the gondola to bank from side to side, and pushing my anxiety ever higher.   I will admit to, upon reaching the other side of the canal, almost crawling along the gondola to the jetty, then collapsing to my knees.   A quick look at my Fitbit showed my heart rate was now a good 20 to 30 bpm higher than it had been on the other side.   I had however managed to cross the canal on a gondola so the aim of a gondola ride had been achieved.   And what an achievement!

So learning point two; don’t cross the Grand Canal on a gondola if you are afraid of water!   No only kidding, it is that sometimes we need to step outside of our comfort zone and do things which are difficult.   I think sometimes we spend too much time looking to make everything easier or more comfortable when in fact difficulty can be desirable and I would suggest is part of a required balance.   We don’t want everything too easy as we then don’t learn, but equally, we don’t want everything too hard as that demotivates;  It needs to be a mix.   I did something which was so very difficult for me, but in doing so I proved I could do it.   On the other bank I had a sense of achievement, alongside a sense of relief.   And if I can cross the Grand Canal what other things which are difficult for me, might I be able to achieve?

Oh, and as we proceeded to explore a little more it turned out that there was a bridge which crossed the canal only a little distance around the bend;  Had I known this at the outset I suspect I would never have made the gondola trip.   This highlights to me how hindsight is 20/20 and therefore how we need to be more accepting where things don’t go quite as planned as although after the event, the reasons may be obvious, at the time that bridge might just be out of sight or obscured and therefore not available to those planning or executing tasks.     Another learning point may be to not trust even your friends however I am going to assume that Gemma and Emma werent aware of the bridge at the outset 😉

If there is to be a final learning point from all of this, it is this:  That we are very busy and forever looking to be better and more efficient at what we do, however equally we need to take some time out, slow down, try new things, look out for experiences, connect with people, including new people, and build memories.   When my time comes (as it almost did on that Gondola) I want to look back on all that I have done and experienced.   I very much doubt that I will be that bothered about how efficient or busy I have been!

Cardiff IT Event

This is a particularly busy week starting with me traveling to Cardiff to speak to IT staff in schools.   In Cardiff my presentation was very much on the state of IT in schools and on the challenges which I see ahead.   As such I thought I would share some of my thoughts post the event.

Digital: The only path forward

I have long spoke about technology and its potential in schools and education more generally.  I remember a talk from 2013 I gave through in Dubai where I talked about a pyramid of requirements which led eventually to teacher and student confidence in technology use, and the resultant embedding of technology in teaching and learning.    Am not sure if we have moved on quite as much as I would have expected from 2013, however, we have certainly moved on.     The world we live in certainly involves more technology and technology is becoming a necessity.   In schools, the pandemic has had an impact pushing more schools to use technology although funding and cost continue to be a notable roadblock for many schools.    And more recently we have seen such interest in artificial intelligence and how it might impact schools including how it might start to help us to address the teacher workload challenge.

But in line with this we have an issue of widening digital divides.   Some schools have invested in infrastructure and devices, whereas others have invested to a lesser extent.   Some students have access to the internet and devices at home, while others’ only device may be their mobile phone, and some may not even have one of these.    And in relation to mobile phones, some schools will seek to ban whereas others manage phones and discuss with students the benefits and risks of mobile phones and online services such as social media.    We also now have generative AI with some schools embracing this, talking and working with students on the appropriate use of generative AI, whereas other schools seek simply to ban it.

Strategy

I have written in the past about my changing views on digital or technology strategies.   I think in the early days of technology use maturity, having a strategy setting out what you want to achieve and how you will go about it is key.   The first steps are big ones and you want to ensure you take people, your staff, students and parents, with you so having a clear strategy is critical.   That said, as technology use in a school matures and is embedded it is more about strategy evolving over time, and adapting to new technologies and changes in how the school and its staff and students operate.   At this point the steps arent that big as you have an embedded technology platform, its more like minor course corrections and adjustments to take advantage of new technologies, new processes or changes in the context of the school.

Cyber and data protection

If there is something that gives a director of IT or a network manager sleepless nights it’s a cyber incident yet they are unavoidable. It’s not an “if” it’s a “when”.    I think it is important that we accept this but also that we ensure we see cyber incidents not as an IT issue but as a school or college-wide issue.   If your internet isn’t working or your MIS is down, it will impact on teachers and students, not just IT staff.    Once we accept that 100% secure is impossible we can work towards doing what is possible and what is reasonable given the available resources.   I previously talked about some key basic activities such as patching, backups including testing of backups and MFA among other things.   If we can do these we reduce the risk and hopefully push the incident which will hit the school further into the future.   But if we accept a cyber incident is guaranteed this gets us to the next key activity being planning for that eventual incident.    This is where a desktop exercise is very useful in identifying assumptions and allowing all involved to explore options but without the pressure and stress of a real life incident.   The Benjamin Franklin quote regarding failing to plan being planning to fail sums this up so very nicely.    And again, this needs to be done at a school level and not limited to IT as the key thing during an incident will be how students are managed, how they are kept safe, how staff are kept informed and how the school manages to maintain as much of a business as usual approach as is possible.

Linked to cyber security I think it is also worth picking up data protection as schools are increasingly processing more and more data.   I know from my own school I can plot the increase in data being stored and the increase in data crossing our internet threshold.   If we are to keep data secure we need to know what data we have, why we have it, who is responsible for it and where it is stored.  Once we have these basics we can then delegate data protection compliance to the relevant data owner and like cyber, see data as belonging to those making the decisions regarding what data is gathered and how, rather than seeing data as an IT issue.

Artificial intelligence

Now any technology post at the moment wouldn’t be complete without some mention of artificial intelligence and this post is no different.   Generative AI has such potential to provide us all with a low-cost assistant which can help, and that’s for both staff and students.    Generative AI isn’t perfect but that’s fine, as if it was why would we need humans at all, and what would it mean to be a human with no purpose, given AI could do everything we can do?    That said AI will continue to improve and get better.   I am already using AI on a daily basis, having sought to identify where it can help with some of my workflows.    The key for me is the AI genie is out of the bottle and there is no putting it back, so we therefore need to see how we can use it as effectively and appropriately as possible, and that’s staff but also students in my view

Conclusion and networks

Technology change is happening at an ever-increasing pace.   Schools and education more generally need to do their very best to keep up but this is a challenge.    But maybe technology shows us our best opportunity of achieving this.    Social media, AirBnB, Uber and many other services are all about crowd-sourcing content and sharing and maybe this is the method we need to use in keeping schools and education up to date.   One of my favourite quotes continues to be from David Weinberger who said “The smartest person in the room is the room”.   So we need to build big rooms full of educators, IT in schools staff and others, and ensure we share and discuss.   Our biggest potential is achieved through collaboration, through sharing and through facing technology change and technology disruption collectively.   That is why I consider myself privileged to be part of some really big rooms including the ANME, the Digital Futures Group and the ISC Digital Advisory Group.   Through networking and sharing we have our best opportunities to keep abreast of constant change, including technological change.

Schools and Academies Show 2024

It was the Schools and Academies show recently and I was once again fortunate to be given the chance to speak at the event, as well as being given the opportunity to be involved in their hosted leaders events prior to the main show.   It was a busy day or so, but equally very useful.

Now the event started with my usual travel woes and my second train being cancelled leaving me looking for a plan B to get to London.   Am not sure why these things keep happening to me;  Is it bad luck, karma or simply a less than resilient rail network operating in the southwest of England?   I suspect there is a bit of everything thrown in.   Thankfully I managed to find an alternative route and made my way to London, and I will admit using the Lizzy line meant that I wasn’t too badly delayed when compared with previously using the tube and DLR.  

So the hosted leaders event before the main event was fun speaking with a variety of different people outside of my usual EdTech crowd including a head from a school abroad, a school SENCO, a school business manager and someone representing a teachers union.  Additionally there was some brilliant music from two students showing off how important the creative arts are.   

As to the event itself I have a fair few meetings with vendors in the diary with these being useful and giving me things to take away from the event.   This included an impromptu discussion with a company providing a managed telephone service aimed at children, looking to help address the challenge of students with smart devices and keeping them safe.   I also met with a well-known interactive whiteboard provider as to some of their recent developments.    Additionally, as I walked the show floor I bumped into people resulting in discussions, often also meaning I was less than timely in my attendance at my scheduled meetings;  To those I turned up too late, I do apologise.

There were also the usual presentations and panels, although this time I didn’t manage to attend as many of these as I had hoped although I did manage to attend a great session towards the start of the day including both Gemma Gwillam and Neelam Parmar.     One session I was annoyed I missed was the session on AI including Sir Anthony Seldon.   Oh, and then there was the panel session I was involved in, and speaking at myself, looking at phones in schools and whether we should seek to ban them.   I will write more on this session and my thoughts in the near future.    It was interesting on reflection that as a panel we were generally in agreement as to the direction of travel in the need to manage phones rather than ban, and also on the importance of education of students and of parents.  The fact the “ban phones” discussion keeps coming up is frustrating given how long it has been discussed however the panel, in my opinion, seemed to show that progress has been made and that many are adopting a more pragmatic and context-driven approach rather than a blanket ban;  This for me is good news.    I will however note that I am not sure if a panel who are all in agreement is a good thing, or maybe we are an echo chamber?   And maybe this is exactly the challenge facing our children, and more broadly society, is the balance between binary arguments and polarisation, and echo chambers and constant reinforcement of current viewpoints.   How do we reach balance?  The chair did try to stir things up by asking what we would do if research did establish a negative causal effect of smartphones on learning, however in the social sciences I think proving such a causal link is nearly impossible as there are simply too many variables at play.

One thing that made this event stand out for me was the DFG (Digital Futures Group) and being involved in the Schools and Academic Show alongside such valued colleagues as Gemma Gwilliam, James Garnett, Darren White and Abid Patel.   The Schools and Academies Show actually saw the DFG officially announce our launch and I look forward to some exciting times ahead with the group and in the lead up to the EduTech Europe event later in the year.   

Also, it was great to catch up with the team from the ANME as well although I did not spend as much time with them and on the ANME stand as I would have liked.   As a group they continue to offer the IT staff in schools and colleges a source of support, help and guidance which is all the more important as technology use increases and given the challenges associated with IT roles which often operate invisibly to the school except when things are going wrong.

In terms of both the DFG and ANME, the quote I so often use, from David Weinberger, is “the smartest person in the room is the room”, and the DFG and the ANME mean I benefit from being part of a very big room, and hopefully am all the better for it.

And if I am looking at the bucket list then this is the first conference I have ever been thrown out off!   And no it wasn’t due to poor behaviour, or controversial views or similar but due to the fact myself and others were so engaged in discussion post-event that the security staff felt the need to (rudely) force us to leave.   Apparently there were issues with public liability as we stood continuing our discussions.

Oh and also I temporarily found myself drink an orange substance that wasn’t the amber nectar, the Irn Bru.  The photo of me during the panel sessions provides evidence of this although the app for the event listed me twice so maybe the non-Bru drinking Gary was actually a doppelganger.    It was a shock to the system but I promise all that normal service was promptly resumed and upon returning home I will drink many cans of the Bru to clear my system of the non-Bru liquid!

So, I write this on the train heading back to somerset, and a three hour trip, all being well which with me is far from guaranteed.  (additional note:   On the return leg, my second train looked like it was going to be cancelled however did turn up just a little late;  that had me worried as the following train wasn’t until 1hr later and it was already 930pm).   So onwards to my next set of events, and what has so far been a very busy 2024;  Better busy than bored, plus sharing and networking continue to enrich my professional development way beyond any CPD course I have ever attended.   

Maybe the DFG and ANME are the model more people should adopt in forming groups, sharing, collaborating and growing together, across different educational sectors and contexts.

Esports event, Salford

I recently had the pleasure of presenting on esports at The Lowry Academy, alongside Kalam Neale from the British Esports Federation.    I have long been a believer in the potential for esports to be a positive vehicle for supporting student engagement but also the development of a lot of the soft skills that are important in life beyond school, including leadership, resilience, and teamwork to name but a few.   It was therefore great to be able to share but also even better to hear what the staff and students at The Lowry Academy, alongside 3 other United Learning Salford schools are all doing in relation to esports.

In terms of my presentation I would like to just share some of my thoughts and 5 pieces of advice in relation to esports, based on my experiences at Millfield, and as shared at the event.

It is not all neon lights

When you think of esports and when you look at professional events it’s all neon lights and high-powered PCs, expensive gaming keyboards, mice and headsets.   From the point of view of schools, this is difficult to square away especially where funding is often limited.    Although creating such environments may have its advantages it isn’t a requirement.  When we launched esports at Millfield we had a couple of IT labs which needed to be updated, plus we were moving to standard desktops rather than the overpriced all-in-ones we had previously.   We knew that the labs needed to be appropriate for Computing teaching and we didn’t want to distinguish these rooms from our other IT labs which weren’t up for replacement.   As such, in looking to prepare to deliver some esports provision we basically increased the spec of the PCs in terms of the graphics card, processor and memory, but opted to keep it in the same PC chassis we normally used.    So, we had two labs with PCs capable of running Overwatch 2, League of Legends and other esports games but the labs themselves didn’t look any different to other IT labs.  I note the higher-spec machines had other potential benefits beyond esports in terms of software they could run to support Computing, Art and other subjects.  That said, later when we started looking at esports and Rocket League in particular at our prep school we simply used the i5, 8Gb PCs we already had, and this worked fine.

Small is good

Now our upgrade work involved two labs as these labs were up for refresh anyway and therefore all we were doing was increasing the cost a little in line with higher spec machines however there is no need to go full lab.  If looking at Rocket League for example it might be ok to have only 3 machines to run a team playing against other schools, or maybe have 6 machines to allow two internal teams to play off against each other.   You can scale the equipment based on your available financial resources combined with your anticipated interest in your planned esports provision.

Beware updates

One thing that has snagged me a few times, usually after a holiday period has been game updates.   Myself and the students have rocked up ready for a bit of Overwatch 2 for example, following the easter break to find each machine needs a 6 or 7Gb update.   Queue a wait before you can get a match started and queue my network team asking what the hell is eating up all of our internet bandwidth suddenly.   As such it is well worth planning to check and update games towards the end of holiday periods to reduce the risk.   The game vendors might still release an update but hopefully by keeping on top of things it will be a smaller rather than cumulative update, and therefore a lesser delay.

Consumables

We haven’t provided any fancy keyboards or mice, which may make us a little less competitive, but it means where there is wear and tear we can quickly replace it.   That said I haven’t seen significant issues with keyboards and mice, however where we have used controllers, these seem to suffer wear and tear and therefore factoring this in to allow for occasional replacement is well advised.   In terms of headsets, the key is to avoid going too cheap, ideally spending a bit more on good headsets, which therefore, with careful treatment by students, are likely to last longer.   I learned this lesson in relation to headsets as an IT teacher years ago, that spending a bit more makes sense and that savings in the short term, on cheaper headsets, often ends up more expensive in the longer term.

Work across year groups

Initially, when I looked at esports I focused very much on getting students in teams with their peers, in the same age group and year group.   This, in hindsight, is I believe a mistake.  I had some issues with low-level behaviour and with the engagement of some students.   As soon as I put students together across year groups it worked much better and I also think it required students to develop their communication and collaboration skills more, given they were having to work with students who may be younger and older, but towards a common aim of winning their match.  I would therefore recommend any esports provision allows students to work across year groups, although within reason.

Conclusion

The FE colleges are doing some amazing things in relation to esports, often spurred on by offering esports BTecs as a programme of study.   Schools lag behind but the potential benefits are the same and the cost of getting involved is minor.   You don’t have to have a room painted black, with neon strip lights, expensive gaming chairs and £2000+ PCs.     All you need is a couple of PCs with the appropriate specification and you can get started.   It was great to hear from Lowry Academy and some of the other United Learning schools in relation to their recent pilot of esports and their Rocket League competition across 4 schools. The student enthusiasm was obvious for all to see. I can only hope that following this event more schools get involved. I look forward to continuing to support the growth of esports in schools and seeing more schools pick up on the potential which esports has to offer.

Is doing more and efficiency our aim?

I have long been concerned by the “do more”, and “be more efficient” narrative which seems to surround our everyday lives.   We are constantly seeking to improve in all we do, which I think is a fair endeavour, but at what cost?   This was recently brought further into focus as I started reading “Thank You for Being Late: An optimists Guide to Thriving in the Age of Accelerations” by T.L. Friedman as I found myself with an hour to spare while waiting to meet someone.   I found myself that bit more content and relaxed as I used the extra hour which had become available to start reading the book and to engage in a bit of people-watching, watching the world rush about its business.  But are these opportunities to stop and reflect reducing in frequency and length?

I look at teaching for example, where I qualified as a teacher back in the late 90’s.   Looking at teaching now, there are so many more things to consider and to do whether this relates to educational research that we are considering, safeguarding, well-being, health and safety, neurodiversity, and much more.  Now all of these things are important but each is another thing to consider, additional cognitive load, or an additional process or task which needs to be completed.  Is there an extra resource in terms of time or cognitive capacity to undertake these things?   The answer is No.   We simply fold them into our everyday workload, which invariably means that although our efforts are getting better, we are also doing more than we ever did before.

Now generative AI can help a little here in that it can help us with some of the heavy lifting and free up some time for us.    This particular post was edited with the help of AI although it wasn’t initially drafted with AI;  I didn’t draft it with AI as this is very much a brain dump of thoughts and as yet AI solutions can’t interface with the human brain, although that may become possible at some point.    But in editing it with AI, I was able to proofread and make changes quicker than I would have been able to do myself therefore reducing the time taken to produce the post.    The challenge here however is this still all exists against a backdrop of “do more”, so the time I may have gained through the help of AI may simply be swallowed up by the next task I need to undertake to continue down the road of continual improvement.   In effect, the net benefit of AI may be quickly nullified by our continued drive for efficiency and maximising output.

Circling back to teaching, this therefore means that generative AI may benefit teachers for a short period, but that eventually, the benefits may simply dissolve in the face of ever-increasing requirements.    But the benefits are so important, that extra time might allow for greater teacher reflection on teaching practice, student learning and student outcomes, it might support greater networking and sharing of ideas plus might support improved well-being for teachers, which I would suggest may result in better teaching, better student outcomes and also better student wellbeing as the students see their teachers modelling good wellbeing practices.   The time AI solutions will provide might support us in spending more time on focussing on what it means to be human and on “human flourishing”.

 Maybe we need to question to “continual improvement” and “efficiency” narratives in that they need to exist in balance and cannot be assumed to be the “right” path.   In relation to continual improvement, I often refer to MVP, minimum viable product and “good enough”.    In relation to efficiency, if I wanted to be more efficient maybe I should stop taking breaks or work through my lunch.    We also need to consider decreasing marginal gains, and maybe that is where we are now, that a lot of the improvements we are bringing about are minor, iterative improvements, but at the cost of cognitive load, time and other resources which may outweigh the resultant benefit.   The extra effort required for each incremental change remains the same, yet the resulting gain is reduced with each change. There is also the challenge of complexity, where more complex processes or systems often bring about greater risk of failure or greater reliance on particular people or tools. And I haven’t even mentioned the speed of change, which the book I am reading refers to in its title, in the “age of accelerations”.   So all of this is happening quicker than ever before which therefore suggests the amount of time we have available to adapt to changes is decreasing.

I don’t have any answers here, so the purpose of this post is not to share a solution, but to pose a question.   I think I know the answer to the question, but not necessarily the answer to the problem it hints towards, but I think the best thing we can do is to start to talk about it and consider it.   So what is the question:

Can we keep adding to the things we need to think about, the processes and the complexity of our lives, or is there a limit?   

AI and general knowledge

I recently was musing on the benefits of general knowledge.   A recent conference I attended involved Prof Miles Berry where he talked about Generative AI as being very well-read.   I had previously seen a figure of around 2000- 2500 years quoted in terms of the time it would take a human to read all of the content included in the training data provided to GPT 3.5, which in my view makes it very well read indeed.   So, I got to wondering if it is this broad base of knowledge which makes generative AI, or at least the large language models so potentially useful for us.

A doctor and AI

Consider, for instance, a medical practitioner. While their expertise lies in diagnosing and treating illnesses, plus their bedside manner and ability to interact with patients and other medical practitioners, their effectiveness as healthcare professionals hinges on a robust understanding of anatomy, physiology, pharmacology, and medical ethics—domains that draw upon general knowledge. Similarly, an engineer relies on principles of mathematics, physics, and material science to design innovative solutions to complex problems.    As a professional, we are required to study and learn from this broad body of knowledge through degree programmes and other qualification or certification requirements.   But we are inherently human which means just because we have learned something at some point, and successfully navigated a qualification or certification route, doesn’t mean that we will remember or be able to access this information at the point of need.    If the medical practitioner therefore uses the AI to assist them initially, they will therefore be drawing on a bigger knowledge base than a human is capable of consuming, plus a knowledge base that doesn’t forget, or fail to remember content at some point learned.     The medical practitioner will still apply their experience and knowledge to the resultant output, bringing their human touch to help address the challenges of generative AI (bias, hallucinations, etc) however the use of generative AI to assist would likely make diagnosis quicker and possibly more accurate.

My changing workflow

The above seems to align with my views in relation to workflows I have changed recently to include generative AI.  Previously I might have known what I wanted to write and therefore get to writing rather than seeking to use generative AI.    Now I realise that, although I know my planned outcome, something which generative AI cannot truly know, no matter how much I adjust and finesse my prompts, generative AI brings to the table a huge amount and breadth of reading I will never be able to achieve.    As such, starting out by asking generative AI is a great place to start.    It will give you an answer to your prompt but will draw upon a far bigger reservoir of knowledge than you can.   You can then refine your prompt based on what you want to achieve, before doing the final edits.    It is this early use of generative AI which I think is the main potential for us all.   If we use generative AI early in our workflows we both get to our endpoint quicker, plus it also opens us up to thoughts and ideas we might never have considered, due to generative AI’s broader general knowledge. I still point my own personal stamp on the content which is produced, making it hopefully unique to my personal style and personality, but AI provides me with assistance.

Challenges and Considerations

Despite its tremendous potential, the integration of generative AI into everyday life and specialized domains poses several challenges and considerations. Chief among these are concerns regarding the reliability and accuracy of AI-generated content, as well as issues related to bias, ethical considerations, and privacy concerns. I do however note here that the issues of reliability, bias, ethics and privacy are not purely AI problems and are actually human and societal issues, so if a human retains the responsibility for checking and final decision-making, then the issue continues to be that of a human rather than AI issue.

Conclusion

Generative AI stands as a transformative force in harnessing and disseminating general knowledge, empowering individuals with instant access to information, facilitating learning and comprehension, and augmenting domain-specific expertise.    It provides a vast repository of knowledge acquired from its training data, which can be used to assist humans and augment their efforts.   I note this piece itself was generated with the help of generative AI, and some of the text and ideas contained herein are ones I may not have arrived at myself, plus I doubt I would have completed this post quite so quickly.    So, if AI is providing a huge knowledge base and assisting us in terms of getting to our endpoint more quickly, plus opening up alternative lines of thinking, isnt this a good thing?   

For education though I suspect the big challenge will be in terms of how much of the resultant work is the students and how much is the generative AI platforms.   I wonder though, if the requirement is to produce a given piece of work, does this matter, and if AI helps us get there quicker, do we simply need to expect more and better in a world of generative AI?

I suspect another challenge, which may be for a future post, is the fact that Generative AI is a statistical inference model and doesnt “know” anything, so is it as well read as I have made out? Can you be well read without understanding? But what does it mean to “know” or “understand” something and could it be that our knowledge is just a statistical inference based on experience? I think, on that rather deep question, I will leave this post here for now.

Google Discovery Day

I was lucky, thanks to a kind invite from Gemma Gwilliam, a colleague from the Digital Futures Group (DFG), to join staff from several Portsmouth schools in a visit to the Google offices in London.  Now I note my school largely uses Microsoft however I have made use of Google as the primary platform in previous schools I have worked with.    For me, the focus for all schools should be using the best tool for the job and therefore this may involve using Google and Microsoft tools at different times and for different jobs.   In this post, I would like to share just a couple of my key takeaways from the event.

Accessibility

This was definitely one of the key areas for the event in discussing the various gaps which exist within education, whether they are academic performance gaps or digital gaps.    The gap related to disadvantaged students, in particular, was discussed but also gaps in relation to accessibility related to special educational needs and disabilities were also raised, including a visit to the Google Accessibility Discovery Centre (ADC).  It was key for discussions and the various sessions which were delivered that technology, including Google technology, has such potential to help us with narrowing these gaps but in itself this presents a bit of a paradox as we would need to first address the gap of access to reliable infrastructure, devices, support, etc.   

Artificial Intelligence (AI)

Unsurprisingly AI was on the list of discussion points and I was really happy to hear some of the same messages I have provided being reiterated.   I liked the example used in terms of how a generative AI solution works in particular.  We as humans when given a question use the information we have absorbed to predict the answer, and a generative AI solution isn’t that much different.  I also liked the comment in relation to hallucinations being a term we should avoid however my concern has always been about this anthropomorphising genAI solutions whereas on this occasion it was raised that it was providing an answer we didn’t expect or which was simply wrong;   Would we want our students claiming they had simply hallucinated or is a wrong answer a wrong answer?      The key here was definitely that AI will increasingly make its way into our daily workflows and the suggestion was that for many of us, it will simply appear in the products we already use and therefore will be almost transparent to us.   This seems to ring a bell as we have been using AI for a while in our spellcheckers, preference functionality in Amazon and Netflix and our search engines, yet have never really identified it as being AI as opposed to being simply how the platform works.

Networks and sharing

One of the key takeaways from this event as with so many other events I have attended is the power of a group of people sharing.   We might not all operate in the same context in terms of our schools, or have the same views, but together sharing ideas, successes and failures, we are all better collectively for it.   David Weinbergers quote continues to be my go-to quote:  “The smartest person in the room is the room”.   The more we share, the more we come together and discuss, accepting disagreement as much as we accept agreement, being brave and encouraging diverse people and views, the better we all are.  

Context is king

One of the other points which really stuck with me in the event was in a presentation which talked about educational research.  The key thing which chimed with me was a warning regarding people who quote that “research says…..”.    I have heard this so often however the reality is that most research is limited in scope to be suggestive in terms of the context, impact, application, etc.    That’s not to discount research as educational research is very important, but we mustn’t lose sight of the importance of context and how something that succeeded or failed in one content, may do the absolutely opposite in a different context.    Education is simply too complex with too many moving parts, the students, the teachers, the parents, the school and many more variables which means that research can be very helpful but it will never provide a cause and effect.   So it’s a great guide and provider of direction but never an out-and-out proof of what will work across all schools, students, etc, in general.

Conclusion

I very much enjoyed the event and feel I took quite a bit from it.   My day-to-day largely does involve Microsoft however I try to avoid referring to my school as a Microsoft school.   We seek to use the tools which have the best impact so it was great to see and hear what Google have to offer and there definitely was a lot that they can offer.  And, an opportunity to network with staff from other schools and contexts is always valuable.    This I suppose is why I believe so strongly in the Digital Futures Group which myself and Gemma are part of, and without which I am not sure this opportunity would have arisen for me.   The more networks like this that exist the better, and hopefully the DFG will help show some of the potential impact and point the way for others looking to set up similar networks.

Phones: a problem or a symptom?

I have recently been reading an interesting book on depression, Lost Connections by J. Hari, as this is something I feel I have struggled with at times, albeit this is a self-diagnosis rather than any form of clinical diagnosis.  Personally, I feel we all suffer depression to a greater or lesser extent, albeit maybe not clinical, at various points in our lives in response to events, challenges and other issues.   Within the book Johann points to societal issues being partly responsible for the increasing number of people suffering anxiety and depression, also talking about societal “junk values”.   This got me thinking about digital addiction and phone use, and my interest was further encouraged by a post from Mark Anderson where he provided some statistics in relation to phone use (see the post here).   But what if our addiction and increasing use of our phones, and other digital devices, isn’t the cause and the thing we need to seek to ban or reduce, but is actually the symptom of a different and broader issue?   Now I don’t propose to have solutions here but this post is about throwing out some thoughts and ideas.

Fame and likes

We have all at some point looked up to a famous person and thought, “I wish that was me”.   Whether it was a famous singer, an artist, or a movie star, I think we all generally want to be more than we are.  Now I am not sure if this want to be better, as measured by others, is intrinsic or whether it has been conditioned over time.   The adverts we consume on TV tell us we need to buy this body spray, or this car or that running shoe to be better so maybe we come to believe we need to be better.   Then in steps social media providing a measure of our fame, with the count of friends or likes, and we chase the thing we can measure rather than what we really want which is to be better.  And so we are forever on our phones seeking to post and share hoping to go viral and get all those likes, rather than looking towards ourselves, being comfortable in our own skins and seeking to be better but in our own eyes and on our own terms.   So is our excessive phone use a symptom of a need to have ourselves validated by others, rather than seeking to value ourselves?

Connectedness

I think it is important to acknowledge that we are still animals in some sense, albeit very intelligent ones, but we still have so much in common with the apes we came from back in the mist of time.   And as animals we need that connectedness, that social interaction of the herd or troop, and again in steps social media and our phones with connectedness on steroids.  Suddenly I am connected to friends, family and many more people, those with similar views and interests and this connection is constantly updating.    The issue here, as I have posted in the past, is that this online connectedness, although it appeals to our inner needs, it doesn’t truly address them so we find ourselves retreating from face-to-face, proper connectedness which will fulfil our needs, in favour of easier but shallow technology enabled connection.   We maybe therefore need to spend less time on digital connectedness and more time on actual connectedness.

Fear of missing out

I have already mentioned how our digital world is constantly updated and always on and this in itself breeds an issue, being we develop this fear of missing out (FOMO).   We are worried about missing out on important information, or the latest viral craze, so we seek to be constantly checking our devices for updates.   We might even become worried that there is something wrong when we haven’t received an update or our phone hasn’t buzzed for a period of time.    We build the habit of constantly checking our devices and constant vigilance to the call of our device for attention whether that be a buzz, a chime or a flashing screen.    But maybe there is another way and maybe we need to spend more of our time and our focus on being in the moment and experiencing our current environment, the company we are in, and the discussion, rather than bothering so much about the online conversations we may or may not be missing.

Efficiency and always connected

The world is only getting busier as we constantly seek to add more tasks and seek to get better.   If you were to look back on the last 6 months and list the extra things you are now doing I suspect we all would have at least a few items however if I was then to ask you to list the things you have stopped or been asked to stop doing, I suspect a shorter list, or maybe blank list would result.   If we do X this will make Y better sounds logical whereas if we DON’T do X this will be make Y better, doesn’t sit as comfortably with us.   And so we create this illusion of the need to be hyper-efficient, always on, always moving, and our devices are happy to play to this.   They facilitate us being connected, us collaborating, us communicating, anywhere, anytime.    But is this truly what life is about, to get as much done as possible and be constantly focused, or is there value in disconnection, quiet contemplation and meditation? 

Commercial interests vs. the user

In writing this post I couldn’t miss raising the issue of the device manufacturers and the platform developers.   They are commercial entities with shareholders.   They want profit and profit comes from keeping users buying their products and their services, keeping them using devices and staring at screens.   They want you alerted and increasingly are pushing further and further into our existence.    Most of our discussion on devices focuses on phones for example, yet now how many of us have wearables such that the notification is unavoidable being strapped securely to our wrists or in future, in the glasses we need to wear to see?   So these companies don’t have our best interests in mind and their approach to dealing with people’s concerns is to provide controls and data for the individual to use to manage their own usage.   But humans aren’t particularly great at doing what is best for themselves as individuals, just consider alcohol, smoking and more recently vaping.   And when faced with a societal push to stay connected, FOMO and much more, the companies must know that putting the control in the hands of individuals will see little progress, although it will allow them to say they did what they could while still reporting positive usage data back to their shareholders.  I think this is where society has to play a part rather than focusing on either the profit-focused companies, or the ill-equipped individual to solve the problem.

Conclusion

I suspect I could write much more on this topic and as I write this I can see so many opportunities for further research.    Rather than seeking to ban, which I am against, or manage, which I am much more supportive of especially in schools, do we need to ask the question of why we are all so quick to reach for our phones and digital devices?   If we consider our usage a problem, then surely we need to get to the why, the cause, as opposed to seeking to address the symptom which is the eventual usage.   Maybe even discussing this with our students will help?

My sense is that a large part of the issue is the values which society currently applies to us.   It isn’t enough to just be me but I have to attain status, I need to be hyper-connected, I need to work stupidly hard and efficiently, and I need to show other people all of this, and our devices deliver on these needs, or at least appear to.   As long as we continue to address this at an individual level, which tends not to work, we fail to get into the bigger problem but how do we bring about societal change?   One step at a time?   One blog post at a time maybe?

ISC Digital Conference 2024

I once again was privileged to speak at the ISC digital conference the other week, this time as the vice chair for the ISC digital advisory group as opposed to a member.   It was, as it was last year, a very useful and interesting conference, combined with an iconic location in Bletchley park.   I scribbled many notes from the various sessions and therefore wanted to distil those into a couple of key thoughts below.

Prof Miles Berry was his usual barrel of energy in his presentation, putting forward lots of interesting points for consideration.   Following on for the Oxford Academies Business Managers Group (OABMG) conference I attended the other week, Miles certainly was brave in his presentation, opting to actually do a live demonstration to illustrate the potential power of generative AI in terms of helping towards the challenges related to teacher workload.   I have attended so many conferences which discuss AI but it was so nice to actually see it in practice as Miles took a topic from the audience and worked through the creation of content for students, resources, lesson plans, etc., all in the space of minutes, but also highlighting that a teacher at their best could likely do better, but certainly not quicker.   This clearly highlights the efficiency and workload benefits of generative AI, but also the importance of seeing genAI as an assistant to be paired with our own human strengths.

Neelam Parmar then presented on developing an AI curriculum and there was one question which stuck very much with me.   What is AI?    Now why this stuck with me is both the inconsistency in terms of the use of the term and related terms (machine learning, deep learning etc.) but also in terms of the broader question it might hint to in terms of what is intelligence.    Can we accurately and consistently define what we mean by intelligence?    And if we cannot can we truly be confident in creating an intelligence, an artificially created intelligence or AI?    It’s a bit deep, but maybe this is a question we maybe need to consider, as it also hints towards considering the differences between human and artificial intelligence, and therefore the benefits and drawbacks of each.   I do often wonder how different an AI is to human intelligence in terms of how the human brain really works in processing the huge amount of “data” in the experiences and information we consume throughout our lives.   Is the key difference between AI that of emotion and the physical nature of our intelligence in relation to our physical existence?   

The AQA presentation was next up in terms of ideas which stuck with me, helping me feel a bit more positive in terms of where we are in terms of exam board engagement in relation to the use of AI in assessment and in schools.  I will admit to being disappointed that the Polish and Italian trial has been pushed back further to 2027, which I think is too far away, however, I get that it takes everyone to be onboard to move this forward so there are hoops exam boards must go through.  That said there were definitely positive noises in relation to analytical data on outcomes with school data being pulled in, and resulting info pushed back.   This goes to reducing the administrative burden but also to more effective use of the vast amounts of data schools gather.  It was also good to hear of AQA seeking to share a diagnostic tool for Maths;  Tools like this might just help us to find the best way forward in relation to adaptive, diagnostic and even summative testing.

I once again enjoyed hearing Tom Dore talk about esports and the potential benefits for schools adopting this.   It aligned so well with the earlier presentation which highlighted some of the softer skills which the World Economic Forum have identified as important for the future.  It is so much more than simply gaming, but involves communication, leadership, resilience, problem-solving and so much more, plus it often engages students who may be otherwise less engaged.   It was also so good to hear Amy-Louise Cartwright’s approach in her school and how they, albeit in their early stages of development, have already made progress and have plans for the future.  I loved the esports suite they have created, as although we have been involved here in esports for a while we have been using our normal IT labs, albeit with upgraded PCs capable of supporting the relevant esports games.

Conclusion

The ISC digital conference, like so many other conferences, is about getting schools and school staff together and sharing.   This year’s conference did exactly that, and that let me get my piece in as well which was nice.   It was also nice to be at Bletchley Park and its wonderful auditorium.   Now I will note my train ride to and from the venue was far from straightforward, but the trek was worth it, and I look forward to seeing where we stand in a years time, at the 2025 conference.   Will we have progressed significantly, be asking the same questions, or will the challenges have changed or even been addressed?   Only time will tell.

Is Gen AI Dangerous?

I recently saw a webinar being advertised with “Is GenAI dangerous” as the title.   An attention-grabber headline however I don’t think the question is particularly fair.   Is a hammer dangerous?   In the hands of a criminal, I would say it is, plus also in the hands of an amateur DIY’er it might also be dangerous, to the person wielding it but also to others through the things the amateur might build or install.     Are humans dangerous, or is air dangerous?   Again, with questions quite so broad the answer will almost always be “yes” but qualified with “in certain circumstances or in the hands of certain people”.    This got me wondering about the dangers of generative AI and some hopefully better questions we might seek to ask in relation to generative AI use in schools.

Bias

The danger of bias in generative AI solutions is clearly documented, and I have evidenced it myself in simple demonstrations, however, we have also more recently seen the challenges in relation to where companies might seek to manage bias, where this results in equally unwanted outputs.   Maybe we need to accept bias in AI in much the same way that we accept some level of unconscious bias in human beings.    If this is the case then I think the questions we need to ask ourselves are:

1. How do we build awareness of bias both in AI and in human decision-making and creation?
2. How do we seek to address bias?   And in generative AI solutions, I think the key here is simply prompt engineering and avoiding broad or vague prompts, in favour of more specific and detailed prompts.

Inaccuracy

I don’t like the term “hallucinations”, which is the commonly used term where AI solutions return incorrect information, preferring to call it an error or inaccuracy.   And we know that humans are prone to mistakes, so this is yet another similarity between humans and AI solutions.   Again, if we accept that there will also be some errors in AI-based outputs, we find ourselves asking what I feel are better questions, such as:

1. How do we build awareness of possible errors in AI content
2. How do we build the necessary critical thinking and problem-solving skills to ensure students and teachers can question and check content being provided by AI solutions?

Plagiarism

The issue of students using AI-generated content and submitting it as their own is often discussed in education circles however I note there are lots of benefits in students using AI solutions, particularly for students who experience language or learning barriers.    I also note a recent survey which suggested lots of students are using generative AI solutions anyway, independent of anything their school may or may not have said.    So again, if we accept that some use of AI will occur and that for some this might represent dishonest practice, but for many it will be using AI to level the playfield, what questions could we ask:

1. How do we build awareness in students and staff as to what is acceptable and what is not acceptable in using AI solutions?
2. How do we explore or record how students have used AI in their work so we can assess their approach to problems and their thinking processes?

Over-reliance

There is also the concern that, due to the existence of generative AI solutions, we may start to use them to frequently and become over-reliant on them, weakening our ability to create or do tasks without the aid of generative AI.   For me, this is like the old calculator argument in that we need to be able to do basic maths even though calculators are available everywhere.    I can see the need for some basic fundamental learning but with generative AI being so widely available shouldn’t we seek to maximise the benefits which it provides?  So again, what are the questions we may need to ask:

1. How do we build awareness of the risk of over-reliance?
2. How do we ensure we maximise the benefit of AI solutions while retaining the benefits of our own human thinking, human emotion, etc?   It’s about seeking to find a balance.

Conclusion

In considering better questions to ask I think the first question is always one about building awareness so maybe the “is GenAI dangerous” webinar may be useful if it seeks to build relevant awareness as to the risks.  We can’t spot a problem if we are not aware of the potential for such a problem to exist. The challenge though is the questions we ask post-awareness, the questions we ask which try to drive us forward such as how we might deal with bias where we identify it, how we might ensure people are critical and questioning such that they sport errors, how we evidence student thinking and processes in using AI and how we maximise both human and AI benefits.  

In considering generative AI I think there is some irony here in that my view is that we need to ask better questions than “Is GenAI dangerous”.    In seeking to use generative AI and to realise its potential in schools and colleges, prompt engineering, which is basically asking the right questions is key so maybe in seeking to assess the benefits and risks of GenAI we need to start by asking better questions.