'We need to become more AI literate', says Irish expert
Artificial intelligence (AI) learning should go beyond the basics of AI literacy to equip students for the future, according to an Irish expert.
Dr Gearóid Ó Súilleabháin is head of the Department of Technology Enhanced Learning at Munster Technological University (MTU), where he leads the development and management of online and blended programmes, promotes research into the enhancement of teaching and learning through technology, and supports the mainstream use of technology-enhanced learning.
Advertisement
In an interview with
BreakingNews.ie
, Dr Ó Súilleabháin said AI learning should go beyond the basics to help students get a more complete understanding.
"I think the best we we can do is become more AI literate which goes beyond just teaching people how to design the right prompts for these generative AI systems and to help people to kind of understand what these systems are doing, how they're built and some of the ethical issues arising in their use, and in the way that they're now moving towards the mainstream.
"I think that's that's absolutely critical. We have to go beyond simply giving people instructions and guidelines about how to use this technology. People need to understand where this technology has come from, what's going on in the background.
"I think we need to understand this is just a kind of a statistical echo, if you like, of what humans do and it might have the same structure or texture of the kind of responses and products of a human mind."
Advertisement
Dr Ó Súilleabháin said the attitude to AI among university educators is mixed. While some would think students would be more positive about AI, he said they share many of the same concerns.
"How can we prepare our students for a world in which these tools are available and maybe even a world of work where these tools are an important part of how work is conducted and organised? I think a lot of higher education institutes and the sector of education in general are maybe kind of balancing caution and curiosity at the moment.
"It's a mixture. I mean the whole thing reminds me somewhat of when the World Wide Web came about. It was was originally developed in the 1990s and a lot of people initially overestimated its short term impact, but perhaps underestimated its long term impact.
"I think that's probably the case with generative AI at the moment. I think a lot of the fears and and optimism perhaps around how it's going to change things overestimates how quickly those changes are going to to happen.
Advertisement
"But I do think over time there's going to be some significant changes to the way in which we live and work and play and communicate. We're going to have to work towards some kind of future where we begin to do more and more things in tandem with this new technology.
"I think the academic response is maybe spread along that that continuum if you like."
Students' fears
He added: "I think they're more mixed than people might realise [students]. They're concerned about this new technology and what it means for their role as students and for our role as as educaters. I think they're very concerned about what it means for the future in cases of jobs that are going to disappear or at least certain job roles that are going to be changed dramatically.
"I guess one of the big questions parents have is 'what courses should my son or daughter do that are going to prepare them for this world of AI'?
Advertisement
"What are the old jobs that are going to be challenged?
"It's hard to say what jobs aren't going to be challenged by it. In many ways, we're maybe witnessing the same kind of change that automation brought to blue collar work many decades ago.
"We may be seeing a similar automation of so-called white collar work or certain professions now."
Detecting the misuse of AI is one area that is a hot topic in education across the board, particularly at third level.
Advertisement
'Arms race'
Dr Ó Súilleabháin said: "It's more difficult to detect and I think it is going to be something of an arms race. Even the tools I would be familiar with have both false positives and false negatives.
"False positives is very problematic in terms of knowing what to do with the results of such a such a tool that you don't end up accusing somebody unfairly.
"But I think in many cases it might be a bit of a misdiagnosis. We we need to think about is how we assess students and how learning is evidenced and just what it is that we're trying to provide for students... and the future that we're trying to prepare them for.
"So for sure it's a concern and in some cases there are assessments where we shouldn't allow any AI and others where we should allow a certain amount of AI. In others perhaps there are assessments where we should give people free rein.
"We need to work out ways of figuring out what that looks like. I guess in in a way that's fair and equitable and and makes for a better educational experience.
"And it goes back to an earlier point about preparing students for a world in which these tools are widely used and are going to be increasingly sophisticated and increasingly integrated.
"The way we do everything increasingly won't be a choice whether to use generative AI or not, it will be embedded in our office, in our operating systems in our smart devices."
In an interview with
BreakingNews.ie
, Dr Ó Súilleabháin said AI learning should go beyond the basics to help students get a more complete understanding.
Despite the challenges, he feels there are a number of big opportunities when it comes to AI and education.
These include tailoring learning for students with different needs, removing some of the mundane aspects of the role for educators to give them more time with students, and preparing students for how AI will change work.
"I think it's very important with any technology to be proactive... to look at its applications and to see how that aligns with our strategic priorities, at institutional level and nationally as well.
"I would like so see us moving towards thinking about how we can use generative AI as a partner, how we can work with it in tandem.
"I suppose the ideal, that may be overly optimistic, is that generative AI takes away some of the drudge work, the routine work and frees us up to do the more creative things, the more human things.
"In the the the world of education, it's a people business. It's about relationships. It's about trust. So concentrating on that stuff, providing mentoring and support and encouragement to students. All of that will still fall to those of us who who teach and support learners.
"Working out how that new hybrid relationship can best be supported and and scaffolded, I think that's essential work to be done."
AI is opening up new possibilities for personalised learning for students.
He added: "In education, I think we need to prepare our users. We need to prepare learners for a world in which humans and machines are working, that the potential here is for is for AI to to augment what humans can do.
"To augment human intelligence in education, that means AI allowing teachers and technology to work closely together, not in competition.
"This will give us a situation where we can support certain yet to be determined routine tasks while freeing up educators and others to focus on what they do best in terms of the mentoring and motivating, and guiding of students.
"AI is opening up new possibilities for personalised learning for students, there are a lot of opportunities I think in terms of greater accessibility.
"So you take students who have particular needs, the ability of the generative AI perhaps to take something and and provide it in different formats and in different modalities to boost their confidence and understaning.
"I think the key is balance that AI is seen as a tool, not as a teacher, not as something to replace teaching or as something to replace learning.
"It's something that that should be there to support human judgement rather than rather than replace it."
Some AI sceptics have argued it should be banned outright in education, but Dr Ó Súilleabháin argued this would be a negative step.
"Banning it would not be technically or operationally feasible, and driving its use underground would not be a positive development because things would then be happening out of sight in a way where we can't provide any guidance or direction.
"Certainly it's a concern that some other countries perhaps are engaging in certain industries more thoughtfully and in a more proactive way with the technology.
"OK, you wouldn't want to see existing inequities, let's say being exacerbated in the way that that things develop, so whatever the benefits are they need to be fairly and and widely distributed..
"Human judgement is always needed. I mean, for me, we'll always need to be on either side of the technology. If you like to put it in simple terms, we're the ones creating the inputs, the prompts. We're the ones applying human judgement."
Assessment
Assessment is another area where there is debate on the use of AI. Dr Ó Súilleabháin said it could be useful in ongoing assessment and projects, but added there would always be human judgement necessary.
"I think already with digital learning, we're seeing a blurring of the line between the learning process and the assessment process more and more.
"The students are producing learning evidence, so I think we're moving away from that paradigm where student get ushered into sports halls every summer, and they have to kind of pour their hearts out and get this one shot at showing that they've achieved with learning outcomes.
"I think there's various points at which the the AI can assist with the assessment process from the start. It could be used for formative assessment purposes, so that's where the feedback is more about feeding into the learning process. I think for the higher stakes assessment, you're still going to want the the human in the pilot seat there as it were. But I mean in the analogy maybe the AI is there as a co-pilot."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
27 minutes ago
- The Guardian
It's true that my fellow students are embracing AI – but this is what the critics aren't seeing
Reading about the role of artificial intelligence in higher education, the landscape looks bleak. Students are cheating en masse in our assessments or open-book, online exams using AI tools, all the while making ourselves stupider. The next generation of graduates, apparently, are going to complete their degrees without ever having so much as approached a critical thought. Given that my course is examined entirely through closed-book exams, and I worry about the vast amounts of water and energy needed to power AI datacentres, I generally avoid using ChatGPT. But in my experience, students see it as a broadly acceptable tool in the learning process. Although debates about AI tend to focus on 'cheating', it is increasingly being used to assist with research, or to help structure essays. There are valid concerns about the abuse and overuse of large language models (LLMs) in education. But if you want to understand why so many students are turning to AI, you need to understand what brought us to this point – and the educational context against which this is playing out. In March 2020, I was about to turn 15. When the news broke that schools would be closing as part of the Covid lockdown, I remember cheers erupting in the corridors. As I celebrated what we all thought was just two weeks off school, I could not have envisioned the disruption that would mar the next three years of my education. That year, GCSEs and A-levels were cancelled and replaced with teacher-assessed grades, which notoriously privileged those at already well-performing private schools. After further school closures, and a prolonged period of dithering, the then-education secretary, Gavin Williamson, cancelled them again in 2021. My A-level cohort in 2023 was the first to return to 'normal' examinations – in England, at least – which resulted in a punitive crackdown on grade inflation that left many with far lower grades than expected. At the same time, universities across the country were also grappling with how to assess students who were no longer physically on campus. The solution: open-book, online assessments for papers that were not already examined by coursework. When the students of the lockdown years graduated, the university system did not immediately return to its pre-Covid arrangements. Five years on, 70% of universities still use some form of online assessment. This is not because, as some will have you believe, university has become too easy. These changes are a response to the fact that the large majority of current home students did not have the typical experience of national exams. Given the extensive periods of time we spent away from school during our GCSE and A-level years, there were inevitably parts of the curriculum that we were never able to cover. But beyond missed content, the government's repeated backtracking and U-turning on the format of our exams from 2020 onwards bred uncertainty that continued to shape how we were assessed – even as we progressed on to higher education. In my first year of university, half of my exams were online. This year, they all returned to handwritten, closed-book assessments. In both cases, I did not get confirmation about the format of my exams until well into the academic year. And, in one instance, third-year students sitting the exact same paper as me were examined online and in a longer timeframe, to recognise that they had not sat a handwritten exam at any point during their degree. And so when ChatGPT was released in 2022, it landed in a university system in transition, characterised by yet more uncertainty. University exams had already become inconsistent and widely variable, between universities and within faculties themselves – only serving to increase the allure of AI for students who felt on the back foot, and make it harder to detect and monitor its use. Even if it were not for our botched exams, being a student is more expensive than ever: 68% of students have part-time jobs, the highest rate in a decade. The student loan system, too, leaves those from the poorest backgrounds with the largest amounts of debt. I am already part of the first year to have to pay back our loans over 40, rather than 30, years. And that is before tuition fees rise again. Students have less time than ever to actually be students. AI is a time-saving tool; if students don't have the time or resources to fully engage with their studies, it is because something has gone badly wrong with the university system itself. The use of AI is mushrooming because it's convenient and fast, yes, but also because of the uncertainty that prevails around post-Covid exams, as well as the increasing financial precarity of students. Universities need to pick an exam format and stick to it. If this involves coursework or open-book exams, there needs to be clarity about what 'proportionate' usage of AI looks like. For better or for worse, AI is here to stay. Not because students are lazy, but because what it means to be a student is changing just as rapidly as technology. Elsie McDowell is a student. She was the 2023 winner of the Hugo Young award, 16-18 age category Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered for publication in our letters section, please click here.
Finextra
2 hours ago
- Finextra
How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Chaos: By Erica Andersen
Or: AI Confessions from the Keynote Stage What a difference a year makes. Last week, I found myself on stage at the AI World Congress, delivering a keynote to a room full of people who, twelve months ago, were probably telling anyone who'd listen that AI was going to solve world hunger, cure cancer, and maybe even fix their corporate expense reporting system. Fast forward to today, and suddenly the same crowd is singing a very different tune. The other keynotes? Let's just say they weren't exactly radiating optimism. Microsoft, Oracle, IBM, McKinsey – the usual suspects – all took their turns at the podium to essentially deliver variations of the same message: "AI is hard. Our systems don't work. Where's our ROI? We're confused and slightly terrified." Welcome to reality, folks. Population: everyone who actually tried to implement AI. The Crybaby Chronicles Now, I don't want to sound unsympathetic. Actually, scratch that – I do want to sound a little unsympathetic, because here's the thing: we've been saying this for years. AI isn't just software with a fancy hat. It's a completely different beast that doesn't play by the rules you learned in your Computer Science 101 class. These organizations have been approaching AI with a software-only mentality, and then acting shocked – shocked! – when things don't work like a traditional database query. AI systems can fail silently, which is terrifying if you're used to error messages that actually tell you what went wrong. They can also appear to work perfectly while delivering completely suboptimal results, which is like having a GPS that confidently directs you to drive into a lake. You need an engineering mindset for this, not just a software background. Engineers understand that things break, that systems are unpredictable, and that you need multiple layers of protection. Software developers expect deterministic outcomes. AI gives you probabilistic chaos with a side of randomness. The Economics of Artificial Anxiety And then there's the money talk. Suddenly, everyone's discovered that running AI costs actual money. Who could have predicted this shocking development? Here's the part that's going to make you really popular at parties: I think the big providers – AWS, OpenAI, the whole gang – are actually undercharging right now. They're burning through investor cash to grab market share. At some point, someone's going to want to actually make money, and those token costs are going to climb faster than a venture capitalist chasing the next unicorn. But here's where it gets interesting. People are obsessing over ROI, but that's like asking what the ROI was on the first spreadsheet. Imagine trying to explain to someone in 1979 why they should pay for VisiCalc: "Well, it's like a calculator, but bigger, and it has boxes, and you can change one number and other numbers change too." Revolutionary? Absolutely. Easy to calculate ROI? Not so much. The smartR Approach: Embrace the Chaos When we work with our AI models in our company we've taken a different approach. We think of AI as Assistive Intelligence, not Artificial Intelligence. The difference isn't just semantic – it's philosophical. Instead of trying to replace humans entirely (which is where most people run into trouble), we augment what people can do. Think of it like having a really powerful, occasionally unpredictable intern. They can do things that are hard or impossible for humans, but you still want someone experienced reviewing their work. The magic happens when you combine AI's raw computational power with human judgment and oversight. You get something better than the sum of its parts, and you avoid the nightmare scenario of full automation gone wrong. The Great Data Myth Here's another sacred cow we love to slaughter: the obsession with perfect data. Everyone keeps saying, "Your data needs to be in order first." Well, guess what? Your data is never going to be in order. It's a beautiful, chaotic mess, and it always will be. But here's the plot twist: AI can actually help clean up your data. Instead of spending months (or years) trying to organize everything perfectly, you can curate good datasets from your underlying messy data. The AI helps with the cleanup process. It's like having a really good research assistant who can find the good stuff buried in your filing cabinet of chaos. People telling you that you must clean all your data first are essentially creating expensive busy work. They're making money off your preparation anxiety while you could be getting actual results. The VC Reality Check We also love talking about how the AI engine companies probably aren't going to make the ridiculous money that had VCs practically hyperventilating with excitement. This technology is going to become commoditized and open source. The real money – the sustainable, long-term money – is going to be made by people who figure out how to actually apply AI to solve real business problems. That doesn't mean these foundational tools aren't important. They're absolutely crucial. But making venture capitalist levels of money from them? That's going to be tough when you're competing against open source alternatives and every tech giant on the planet. Privacy: The Chickens Come Home to Roost And speaking of uncomfortable truths, let's talk about privacy. We've been banging this drum for years, pushing private and secure models while everyone else was happily shipping their data off to the big cloud providers. Well, surprise! A US court just told OpenAI they can't delete anything – including conversations people specifically asked to be deleted. Your private messages might become public evidence. But surely GDPR will save us, right? Wrong. America doesn't care about your data protection laws. The worst that will happen is some European official will impose a token fine, give a stern speech about showing those big bad tech companies who's boss, and then everything will continue exactly as before – except now your private information is scattered across the web like digital confetti. If you want your data to stay private, don't send it outside your ecosystem. It's that simple. The Swiss Cheese Philosophy Here's the thing about AI mistakes: they're inevitable. Sometimes what looks like a mistake to one person is actually a reasonable answer to someone else. That's just the nature of the beast. I like to think of AI implementation using the Swiss cheese model. Imagine multiple layers of cheese stacked on top of each other, each representing a different safety barrier. The holes represent vulnerabilities. No single layer is perfect, but together they provide protection. AI should be another layer or two of cheese in your stack. It adds protection and capability, but it shouldn't be the only layer. If you're going to remove human oversight, you better be absolutely confident that the AI can't break your entire system. The Bottom Line We're constantly upgrading our proprietary platform, based on real-world implementation experience. We've learned that AI works best when you stop trying to make it behave like traditional software and start treating it like the powerful, unpredictable tool it actually is. The companies crying about AI being hard aren't wrong – it is hard. But it's hard in an interesting way, like switching from building model airplanes to building rockets. Sure, they both fly, but rockets require understanding thrust vectors, fuel chemistry, and the uncomfortable reality that sometimes they explode spectacularly on the launch pad. The physics are different, the margin for error is smaller, but when you get it right, you're not just flying – you're reaching orbit.. The key is approaching it with the right expectations, the right safeguards, and maybe a sense of humor about the whole thing. Because if you can't laugh at the absurdity of trying to teach machines to think while we're still figuring out how human thinking works, you're probably taking this whole AI revolution thing a bit too seriously. And trust me, after listening to those other keynotes, we could all use a little less seriousness and a lot more practical wisdom about what AI can actually do – and what it definitely can't. Written by Oliver King-Smith, founder and CEO, smartR AI
Geeky Gadgets
3 hours ago
- Geeky Gadgets
iPhone 17 Last-Minute Changes Will BLOW YOUR MIND!
Apple's upcoming iPhone 17 lineup may represent a pivotal moment in the company's evolution, emphasizing a stronger focus on customer feedback and practical enhancements. By addressing user concerns and introducing meaningful updates, Apple appears to be aligning its strategy with the needs of its diverse user base. The video below from The Apple Circle gives us more insights into the anticipated changes, the motivations behind them, and their potential impact on the future of the iPhone. Watch this video on YouTube. Listening to Customers: A New Chapter for Apple Apple has a track record of responding to user feedback, albeit sometimes after initial resistance. Notable examples include the reintroduction of ports to the MacBook Pro and significant updates to iPadOS to better suit user workflows. These instances highlight Apple's ability to adapt and refine its products based on consumer input. With the iPhone 17, Apple seems poised to take this approach further by addressing key user demands, such as: Improved battery life: Making sure longer usage times to meet the needs of modern users. Making sure longer usage times to meet the needs of modern users. Expanded storage options: Accommodating the growing size of apps, photos, and videos. Accommodating the growing size of apps, photos, and videos. A more intuitive product lineup: Simplifying choices to make purchasing decisions easier. By focusing on these areas, Apple could reinforce its commitment to delivering products that resonate with its customers' expectations and daily needs. A Simplified and Diversified iPhone 17 Lineup One of the most anticipated changes in the iPhone 17 series is a potential restructuring of the product lineup. Apple may simplify its offerings to create a clearer distinction between models, making it easier for users to identify the device that best suits their needs. Speculation suggests the introduction of four distinct models: iPhone 17: A standard model offering essential features at a competitive price point. A standard model offering essential features at a competitive price point. iPhone 17 Slim: A mid-range option designed to balance performance and affordability. A mid-range option designed to balance performance and affordability. iPhone 17 Pro and Pro Max: High-performance models catering to professionals and tech enthusiasts. High-performance models catering to professionals and tech enthusiasts. iPhone 17 Ultra: A premium device aimed at power users, featuring exclusive capabilities and materials. The Ultra model, in particular, could stand out with features such as a larger battery, advanced camera systems, and premium build quality. This diversified lineup would allow Apple to appeal to a broader audience while maintaining its reputation for innovation and excellence. Looking Ahead: Foldable iPhones and Anniversary Models Apple's long-term vision for the iPhone may include bold innovations, such as a foldable device. While still speculative, a foldable iPhone could position Apple as a leader in this emerging market, offering users a blend of portability and functionality. Additionally, with the 20th anniversary of the iPhone approaching in 2027, there is growing anticipation for a commemorative model. This special edition could feature unique design elements and exclusive features to celebrate the milestone. To address evolving user preferences, Apple might also consider practical design changes. For instance, slightly thicker devices could accommodate larger batteries, addressing a common complaint about battery life. Furthermore, introducing vibrant color options for Pro models could enhance their appeal, giving users more ways to personalize their devices. Practical Features Driven by User Feedback Apple's focus on customer-driven improvements could lead to the introduction of practical features that address long-standing user requests. Potential enhancements for the iPhone 17 include: Increased base storage: Allowing users to store more apps, photos, and videos without the need for immediate upgrades. Allowing users to store more apps, photos, and videos without the need for immediate upgrades. Free iCloud backups: Providing users with peace of mind by eliminating additional costs for essential data storage. Providing users with peace of mind by eliminating additional costs for essential data storage. Enhanced MagSafe functionality: Supporting faster charging speeds and a wider range of compatible accessories. These updates would not only improve the overall user experience but also strengthen Apple's reputation for delivering value and addressing customer needs. Balancing Innovation and Responsiveness The iPhone 17 lineup could signify a turning point in Apple's strategic approach. Historically, Apple has been known for its ability to set trends and redefine industries. However, recent developments suggest a growing emphasis on adapting to customer needs and preferences. This balance between innovation and responsiveness may shape Apple's future as it seeks to maintain its leadership in the competitive tech landscape. By integrating user feedback and exploring new possibilities, Apple has the opportunity to redefine what it means to create a customer-focused smartphone. Whether these changes will fully meet user expectations remains to be seen, but the potential for a more adaptive and responsive Apple is an exciting prospect. The iPhone 17 could serve as a testament to the company's ability to evolve while staying true to its core principles of quality and innovation. Find more information on the iPhone 17 lineup by browsing our extensive range of articles, guides, and tutorials. Source & Image Credit: The Apple Circle Filed Under: Gadgets News Latest Geeky Gadgets Deals Disclosure: Some of our articles include affiliate links. If you buy something through one of these links, Geeky Gadgets may earn an affiliate commission. Learn about our Disclosure Policy.
