UNLEASH

ED

Tag: technology

  • Saying No to A.I.

    Saying No to A.I.

    “I’m here to tell you the mission of your generation is to destroy A-I. Kill it. To accomplish this, you’ll have to capture and reprogram an A-I to be on the side of humanity, then commandeer its own time-traveling technology, send it back to the past to defeat the current A-I before it gains sentience. This isn’t just graduation day, this is Terminator 2 Judgment Day.”

    “And I know, I know there’s someone sitting out here right now who’s just like, “Well, you know, what about the use of A-I to pioneer breakthroughs in medicine and physics?” Well, first of all, shut up, nerd. I’m not talking about that. Obviously, if you’re using it for that purpose, you’re not the problem, okay? I’m talking about the accumulation of cognitive debt due to excessive use of large language models according to a study by MIT published in 2025 in Archives.”

    “Look, this is actually good news, okay? This is why you guys shouldn’t be scared of AI, because I think AI is just going to end up making mediocre people dumber. Have you heard how dumb people brag about how they use AI? They’re always like, “Hey, did you know that AI can now read my email, summarize it, and drop a response?” Yeah, you know who else can do that? Me. I can do that. You can’t do that? How useless are you? You need artificial intelligence just to match me? I’m a dumbass who couldn’t get into Harvard.”

    “From what I can see, getting an actual advantage from AI in the future will require a minimum escape velocity of intelligence that I’m assuming you guys from Harvard have. Everyone else who can’t match that is just going to get dumber, and that’s when you run up the score on them, assuming we still have a functioning society, of course.”

    “Untalented people love bragging about using AI to help them draft their speeches and their scripts and their podcasts and their promo videos for UFC fights at the White House, which to be fair, even if they had filmed that for real, it would still have looked like AI. But what they’re missing is this. The creating is the fun part. The best part of comedy writing is figuring out the puzzle pieces of a joke and getting the self-regard from having accomplished a difficult thing. Why would I want AI to take that away from me?”

    “You know what problem I want A-I to solve? I want the problem of AI making everything look like shit. I want AI to solve that problem. How about that?”

    Ronny Chieng, 2026

    There are so many truth bombs being laid out here. There’s such a degree of humour that it’s hard to take it seriously. And yet, so much of what Ronny Chieng said at Harvard was absolute truth. As guest speaker at Harvard’s Class Day as part of their Commencement 2026, Comedian Ronny Chieng took to the stage and laid it all out. You can read the full transcript here: https://singjupost.com

    A couple of weeks a go I began to get ads in my feed advertising the latest education AI build.  “Get your Sundays back” it said, hinting that teachers spend their Sundays planning, and that instead of doing that, AI could do it for you, or make it so you don’t spend your entire Sunday planning.

    The reality is, I choose to do my planning on Sunday, for a number of reasons. In my early career, I used to do my planning throughout the week for the following week. On Wednesday afternoon after 3pm, I would make the Maths plan. Thursday was Reading and Writing, and Friday was for everything else.

    The problem was, by the time Monday came around, things had changed. Maybe on Friday we didn’t get through the work I thought we would of, and so adjustments would have to be made. What’s more, on Monday morning I would have to look at the plan to refresh my memory; given I was operating from a plan devised in the middle of teaching the plan I’d devised the week prior.

    For a long time I refused to do planning in the weekend. One, I wanted to preserve the weekend for myself and my family. Two, as a Christian, Sunday was hands off for anything work related as I observe a day of rest.

    I’m not sure what changed, but for whatever reason I made my day of rest Saturday, which is traditionally the Sabbath anyway, allowing me to complete my planning on Sunday. It transformed my entire workload. Things were more clear, with the week before being complete, and I could plan from where we left off exactly, rather than adjusting things if we didn’t get as much done as was hoped. But the biggest payoff by far was the retention of the plan in my head. No longer did I have two days of family time creating a mental block between my plan I made last week and what I had to teach this week. The plan from Sunday flowed into the teaching of Monday, and rarely did I have to look at my planning. Now, if I have all my resources sorted for the week, it is very rare I have to even look at my planning. Usually it’s just a quick reminder of any anomalies to the routine.

    So, no. I won’t bow to the suggestion of getting my Sunday’s back. I use Sunday’s for reasons. Reasons that make my job easier, not harder.

    I’ve made a conscious decision to limit my use of A.I. Especially when it comes to teaching. Those that know me, know that I enjoy making things look nice. I’m fairly particular in how I want things to look like. This ranges from resources, to classroom displays, to Powerpoints and even unit plans.

    Using AI to do things like resource creation is problematic. Not because the resource is made in next to no time, but because it doesn’t end up looking like I want it to. I then have to modify and adjust the design to my liking, rather than just beginning with a blank canvas and doing it myself. Secondly, I nearly never remember anything that A.I. has done – certainly not to the degree that I remember things if I make it myself. The brain just doesn’t process it the same. The sentiments of Ronny Chieng ring true.

    “The creating is the fun part. The best part of comedy writing is figuring out the puzzle pieces of a joke and getting the self-regard from having accomplished a difficult thing. Why would I want AI to take that away from me?”
    “Have you heard how dumb people brag about how they use AI? They’re always like, “Hey, did you know that AI can now read my email, summarize it, and drop a response?” Yeah, you know who else can do that? Me. I can do that. You can’t do that? How useless are you?”

    When I tried to utilise AI to formulate my Maths planning of three groups using a widely used resource, I found I had to double-check what it had come up with, and then spent twice as much time adjusting the prompt and asking A.I. to recreate it. By the time I’d finished, it would have been quicker, if not about the same amount of time to have just made it myself – and I would have the added bonus of being able to recall what I had made without necessarily having to re-read it all.

    Having A.I. make and create planning might require no brain power and minimal time spent initially, but at some point I will have to spend that time reading it and understanding it in order to teach what it has planned for me to teach.

    For me, if you begin to rely on A.I. for these tasks, you are going to lose those skills that are an important part of teaching. The creativity. The organisation. The logistics. The resource knowledge. The autonomy. As Chieng said – Why would you want AI to take that away from you?

  • Digital Curriculum: Destiny or Disaster?

    From the first day of full time employment at a school, I was put in charge of “Technology”, not for my design process skills, but for my knowledge of ICT and computers. I became the go to guy in fixing problems with teacher laptops, sound systems and projectors. That soon became student Chromebooks and student iPads. Of course, the school had external support as well, but having someone onsite is incredibly convenient, especially when ICT can be problematic at the drop of a hat, and is becoming more and more relied upon by teachers to bring learning to today’s learners.

    You’d think I’d be incredibly excited and enthusiastic about the announcement of the new ‘digital curriculum’ being implemented around the country in 2020. What an opportunity to share my passion and knowledge of ICT with the next generation and prepare them for the world of tomorrow as we delve deeper into the digital age.

    However, I’m not.

    You see; I’m also a self-taught programmer myself. I design and code websites. This site was built by me, though largely a theme, it has been modified to suit my own tastes and coded to reflect that. I have built my own personal website from the ground up on the back of WordPress. I dabble in CSS (with SASS / LESS), PHP, HTML, and Javascript.

    There’s not many teachers (especially primary school) who can say that!

    I know that behind every code, there is a whole bunch of trial and error, refreshing, and testing. Programming is largely just problem solving.

    My issue is that in my current job, that we are having trouble enough teaching students to read, write, and do math, let alone be able to create a simple script that includes tags, if/else statements, or simple calculations.

    In 2015, I taught a class with one-to-one Chromebooks, and we spent the first term learning how to spell our last names, because the school email address for students is firstname.lastname@schoolname.ac.nz.
    Then it was time to remember our passwords.

    Sure, the curriculum itself isn’t going to be getting students to create complex code or learn any particular language, just like Year 1 students won’t be learning their 8 times tables. However, it would seem to me that certain priorities need to be addressed first – such as basic literacy and numeracy skills. Something tells me that for many students, it will become a matter of running before they can walk.

    My other gripe is that the Ministry can announce a digital curriculum and implement it within a few years, and yet there still isn’t an actual Māori / Te Reo Māori curriculum. I guess it shows where the priorities are.

    Fun and Games?

    So then, what will they be doing? And will it be at all relevant to what they need in the future? Or is it all just a little bit of fun and games and doing something “cool”?

    The curriculum document says:”

    In years 1–8, these two areas are usually implemented within other curriculum learning areas, integrating technology outcomes with the learning area outcomes. These two areas also significantly contribute to students developing the knowledge and skills they need as digital citizens and as users of digital technologies across the curriculum. They also provide opportunities to further develop their key competencies.

    – NZC Online, TKI. 

    It goes on to outline exactly what “Computational thinking for digital technologies” and “Designing and developing digital outcomes” mean for the students, and a lot of it is around raising awareness of what computers are capable, what their limitations are, what problems can be solved with them, and what possibilities there are. It ranges from programming to digital media and safety online.

    So it might not all be so doom and gloom – especially considering that for the most part, I already try to integrate digital technology throughout all other areas of learning.

    Those of you who have ever been around children and technology, you’ll know at how quickly they pick things up and run with them. I remember my 2 year old nephew taking photos on my phone and then flicking through them all after he’d taken some!

    Are you Ready?

    I have to give the Ministry some credit here too. Unlike National Standards where they were inflicted upon us without any kind of preparation or support, they have gone above and beyond to provide schools with resources and support through their Kia Takatū ā-Matihiko – Digital Readiness programme. Schools wanting to up-skill and get on board with the new digital curriculum should head over there now and check out the resources on hand to support you and your staff in getting up to speed with the new curriculum area.

     

  • The Answer to everything is not an App.

    It’d seem that there is a reliance on tech and apps to meet the needs of students with learning difficulties.

    While there are apps and assistive technologies to help students with their learning, the reliance or focus on one particular app is not what the likes of RTLB or Special Needs teachers should be using to “solve” the learning needs of ‘problem’ children. It may be appealing because of a one off price that seems to satisfy the powers that be as a successful outcome for the student and signs off the intervention.

    But there is no way that any app, no matter how developed, how much money has been poured into it, that it should ever be “the answer” for students’ learning difficulties.

    Why?

    Because there is never ever one reason for students struggling in their learning. There are usually a myriad of issues, and strategies that address these are not going to be encompassed in an app.

    Don’t get me wrong, tech can be incredibly supportive in assisting students with with their learning; but in my experience it is much less about the apps you use, but the process that the technology makes and allows for in the classroom.

    Furthermore, teaching ‘an app’ is restricted to using that app and the limitations of it. Teaching a process opens up the student to other possibilities for using the technology (or not) in the future. Take for example Writing. You could teach a student how to use Microsoft Word and it could help them to write. But teaching them how to write is actually better (or more to the point – what is needed), and there are any number of apps that could assist with this, including Word, Google Docs, or Collabrify Writer.

    Somewhat ironically, I know of a case where a student diagnosed with dyslexia received the support of using the Chromebooks in the classroom to do her writing. This was the recommendation from the specialist that was providing the support for the teacher, and supposedly the student.

    However; talking with the student; she preferred to do her writing by hand because she didn’t have to ‘find’ the letters on the keyboard when she could just write them with a pencil when she wanted.

    Sometimes technology doesn’t have the answer that we’re looking for.

  • Coding in the Curriculum

    In 2018, the New Zealand Curriculum is destined to have a new addition to its subjects.

    From the age of five, children will now be taught about coding, logic, problem solving, if-else statements, app making, social media analytics, and probably hacking as well.

    But there is a lot, a LOT, of apprehension about this, even as a techie myself (for instance – I design websites, and have coded for much of my adult life). Put it this way; I’m not jumping up and down about this announcement.

    Who?

    I don’t know about you, but the first thing I asked was who is going to do this? I have met many a good soul who dedicate their lives to teaching students, but who’s computer literacy is extremely limited.

    And while the content knowledge required to for Level 1 of the curriculum will be very basic, it still requires a great deal more teaching knowledge to be able to teach it effectively. What are students getting stuck on? What are the next steps? How do I solve the next problem?

    Take for example Level 1 of the Reading curriculum. It’s fairly straight forward. Most, if not all (fairly presumptive, I know) adults could achieve this. Now think of the teaching knowledge you would need in order to teach it effectively. The sounds, the blends, the phonics, digraphs, vowel sounds and rules around their usage, the common pitfalls and sticking points as well as the various strategies required to assist and help students to progress to level two. And that’s just scraping the surface of teaching students to read.

    Imagine the level of teaching knowledge that is going to be required to effectively teach digital literacy.

    And now take that to level two, and level three of the curriculum.

    My current estimate, based on my current place of employment and the various other schools I have worked in, would be that about 10% of teachers would have the skill set required to teach digital literacy if it was introduced tomorrow. And that 10% is probably generous. Most of what makes a good programmer, coder, or even just a ‘tech guru’ is the ability to solve problems. When something goes wrong, you need to know what to do to fix it, systematically, step by step, eliminating variables as you go. From experience, many teachers struggle to problem solve why their projector isn’t connecting, or why the sound isn’t working on their laptop. How do we then get to a place where teachers are teaching students even more complex problem solving when you introduce if-else statements that don’t work!

    Many non-tech-savvy people turn to one demographic for help. Young people. Why? Because they’re already up with the play on technology. Their desire to explore, to learn, to develop skills with technology seems to happen automagically, and I can only see teachers and schools getting in the way of that. As well as this, I read an interesting post about ‘future-proof’ learning, predicting what the future holds for our students, and how we can’t and shouldn’t be including things in the curriculum that are a phase, or a fad.

    (Note: I realise that schooling exists past primary school; but we already have specialist subject teachers at Intermediate and High School level, and so schools would merely employ a specialist ‘digital literacy’ teacher.)

    How?

    Another aspect that may or may not have been considered is how schools are going to teach it. You know, the practical side of it. You see; I’ve only once had to write down a piece of code on paper (during a Comp101 exam I took in Uni). It was nigh on impossible not being able to check and edit the code to improve it or to see if it worked. A lot of coding is trial and error.

    Essentially, if digital literacy is to be taught, then students will need devices. Doing it with pencil and paper will only last so long.

    Now I’m not sure about your school; but our decile 2 school has only just got to the point of having 1 device between 2 in the senior school, and 1 to 4 in the junior school. Yes; we can combine sets of these devices to allow every student to have access to one, but my point is, there are lots of schools out there who wouldn’t have this level of technology in their school yet.

    With more devices comes more problems. More students who run into connection issues, which in turn requires the teacher to know how to solve that problem (many of which once again, don’t know how to go about doing this on their own laptops as it is).

    When?

    Ultimately though, when are teachers going to fit this in? Or is it going to be integrated throughout the day? I guess that comes down to the individual teacher. But I know for one, I would love to spend more time teaching students how to use the Chromebooks, how to code a website, and more; but the reality is that I have a hard enough job covering the rest of the curriculum sufficiently, as well as the ever increasing demand on Maths, Reading, and Writing, without adding more to that workload.

    Gripe

    Don’t get me wrong. I’m not having a go at my colleagues or other teachers. They all have strengths and are all marvellous teachers. I merely see a massive gap between adding a subject to the curriculum and the current knowledge of those that have to deliver content about that subject. Massive gap.

    I can see my job as a tech-savvy teacher becoming more than it already is, as I can see me having to assist with other classes tech problems more than I already do, provide support for when tech devices go wrong, and provide ongoing P.D. as teachers encounter problems or inspiration that they want to explore.

    Once again – not sure when I’m going to actually get to teach my own class.

  • BYOD – Bring Your Own Distraction

    BYOD – standing for Bring Your Own Device, has been around for a while now; ever since schools opened up their networks and went wireless, students and teachers alike have been able to access the wealth of information that is available on the internet today.

    But as a speaker at Interface Xpo 2014 put it, BYOD is more aptly put as ‘Bring Your Own Distraction’.

    I chuckled, as I’m sure many of you have as well. Then I realised the truth in it.

    When I say ‘Then’; it did take a while. It took two terms of teaching in a 1-to-1 Chromebook classroom of Year 3-4 students to realise that for many the device in front of them was not a learning tool; it was a distraction.
    Instead of harbouring the potential wealth of knowledge available to them, the students were more enamored with watching youtube videos by the bucket load, changing their background picture, and making their Chromebook talk to them. The question “Are we going to use the Chromebooks today?” became almost as common as “Can I go to the bathroom?”. Searches changed from ANZAC Hero’s, to Superhero’s, to Iron Man, Marvel, and at one point which was bound to happen, ‘sexy girls’. Oh for the love of Pete!

    Unless absolute specific tasks are set, the devices become a source of fun and free time, and trouble.

    Let’s face it: these devices are a distraction. And it isn’t an age thing.

    I don’t know how many staff meetings I have ‘missed’ because I was on my laptop organising my calendar or checking emails. I don’t know one single time I have been given a wifi-password at a conference to listen to the speaker and follow their online notes without a Facebook tab opened in the background. All of these distractions are at the core of technology. Because it can do so much, and meet so many ‘needs’, we have become accustomed to accessing and integrating all of these different sources at once. Even as I sit here writing this, I have two other tabs open, my phone next to me with Facebook and Twitter updates coming through, and Stephen Fry Gadget Man playing on the TV in the background. And this has become my norm.

    Distractions.

     

    Upskill the Distractions

    I was then disheartened by the following report about tech in schools.

    In it, we hear from the Education Council about upskilling teachers to keep up with the technology. “A recent government survey showed only 14 percent of teachers felt they were up to speed on using digital devices for learning. The Education Council wants to see more opportunities for teachers to up-skill.”

    There are some initial issues with this. Firstly, many classrooms, schools, etc. do not have the resources for “tech” classrooms. I know for the class I am in with 1-to-1 Chromebooks, that large amounts of money have been put into making it a reality. The reason I got the task, is because I am tech savvy, much more so than any other teacher in the school. Without blowing a trumpet of any kind, I would put myself in that top 14% of teachers in terms of technology know-how or capability.

    So why does this article dishearten, rather than invigorate? Surely I should be at the forefront, championing the likes of Taupaki School?

    I find myself somewhat over it. Maybe I’ve just given up on the use of technology in the classroom. Maybe it’s just too big, too fast to keep up with. Maybe it is just because the age of students I am teaching, in that technology for practical use is a few years away for them. Maybe because most of my technology learning has been self taught, and most of our students are self taught with technology as well. Maybe I’m just coming at this from my primary school teacher point of view. I don’t know. At this stage in their life, technology is for entertainment purposes. Maybe for secondary teachers, the upskilling to use technology throughout their classes would be more beneficial, and might be what the article is really getting at. But for me, if these students are going to be using and learning the technology anyway, why should schools put financial pressure on themselves, why should teachers upskill to try and be cool for the kids by ‘speaking their language’. Are going too far to bend over backwards for students, rather than the other way around?

    But it concerns me when a teacher in the video says the kids don’t want to go outside at lunchtime. Does this not create further ammunition for the ‘childhood obesity epidemic’ scaremongers? This is a whole other debate which I won’t get into here.

    It concerns me that we know how quickly technology moves, and we have no idea where it will take us, or the skills that students will need in the future. But no doubt they’ll cope. Why does teaching need to be at the forefront of all things technology? For decades, teachers and classrooms have been decades behind the rest of the world. While offices were getting filled up with beautifully fast, glamourous Macbook Pro’s, schools were left back in the 90’s with iMacs clogging up desk space. A scientific calculator was about as BYOD as it would come. Why is there a sudden need to ‘keep up’ with the kids, rather than focussing on teaching (and them learning) the ‘basics’; such as spelling; such as handwriting; such as mixing paint colours, adding and subtracting in our heads, catching and throwing, or even how to make friends, keep friends, show resilience, or learn respect? Do we need an app to teach students to read? Will methods that have been tried and true for decades and decades, and taught us to read, work just as well for students? Or have students become too addicted to ‘entertainment’ that if it’s not a fun game, then I don’t want to do it.

    It concerns me when “This tsunami of digital kids just keeps coming through our system.” is referred to like a natural disaster. We are essentially creating this ourselves. We enable our students by providing these opportunities under the guise of engagement, when really, we’re creating dependency for screens, an addiction to devices. Do they need it? Or is it a distraction from real learning. Yes, I can show you evidence that technology in and of itself motivates and engages students. The very comment earlier about kids not wanting to go out demonstrates this. But at what cost? And is motivation and engagement enough if there is no learning, or not the right learning associated with it. I guess this comes back to having learning specific tasks.

    I always had a bit of a joke when someone would ask about whether we should go ‘BYOD’. I would respond with once students can bring their own lunch, then you can start to worry about them bringing their own device.

    I would appreciate some input on this issue. As you can probably tell, I’m still trying to formulate my standpoint on this one. On the one hand, I love technology and want to share that passion with my students. On the other hand, I have seen technology distract from real learning, and seen schools getting away from the basics of learning. Please feel free to comment your thoughts below and I will look into including more thoughts into this article.

     

    Related Reading