Leia o texto para responder à questão. 

AI tech products at schools and universities

    Every few years, an emerging technology shows up at the doorstep of schools and universities promising to transform education. The most recent? Technologies powered by generative artificial intelligence, also known as GenAI. These technologies are sold on the potential they hold for education. As optimistic as these visions of the future may be, the realities of educational technology over the past few decades have not lived up to their promises, as shown by rigorous investigations of technology after technology – from mechanical machines to computers, from mobile devices to massive open online courses.

    Yet, educational technology evangelists forget, remain unaware or simply do not care. Or they may be overly optimistic that the next new technology will be different than before.

    Here are four questions I believe should be answered before school officials purchase any technology that relies on AI.

    1. Is there evidence that a product works?

   Compelling evidence of the effect of GenAI products on educational outcomes does not yet exist. Therefore, and unfortunately, it is the consumer who carries the onus of appraising products. My recommendation is: use multiple means for assessing product effectiveness.

    2. [...]

   Oftentimes, there is a divide between what entrepreneurs build and educators need. For example, one shortcoming of the One Laptop Per Child program – an ambitious program that sought to put small, cheap but sturdy laptops in the hands of children from families of lesser means – is that the laptops were designed for idealized younger versions of the developers themselves, not so much the children who were actually using them.

  Initiatives have been implemented in which entrepreneurs and educators work together to improve educational technology products. Some products are developed with input from students and educators. Questions to ask vendors might be: In what ways were educators and learners included? How did their input influence the final product?

    3. What educational beliefs shape this product?

   Educational technology is rarely neutral. It is designed by people, and people have beliefs, experiences, ideologies and biases that shape the technologies they develop.

   It is important for educational technology products to rely on what educators have experienced as relevant to the students they meet in their real-life classes. Questions to ask include: What pedagogical principles guide this product? What particular learning does it support or discourage?

    4. Does the product level the playing field?

   Finally, people ought to ask how a product addresses educational inequities. Is this technology going to help reduce the learning gaps between different groups of learners? Or is it one that aids some learners – often those who are already successful or privileged – but not others? Is it adopting an asset-based or a deficit-based approach to addressing inequities?

   Educational technology vendors and startups may not have answers to all of these questions. But they should still be asked and considered. Answers could lead to improved products.

(George Veletsianos. https://theconversation.com, 15.04.24. Adaptado)

Leia o texto para responder à questão. 

AI tech products at schools and universities

    Every few years, an emerging technology shows up at the doorstep of schools and universities promising to transform education. The most recent? Technologies powered by generative artificial intelligence, also known as GenAI. These technologies are sold on the potential they hold for education. As optimistic as these visions of the future may be, the realities of educational technology over the past few decades have not lived up to their promises, as shown by rigorous investigations of technology after technology – from mechanical machines to computers, from mobile devices to massive open online courses.

    Yet, educational technology evangelists forget, remain unaware or simply do not care. Or they may be overly optimistic that the next new technology will be different than before.

    Here are four questions I believe should be answered before school officials purchase any technology that relies on AI.

    1. Is there evidence that a product works?

   Compelling evidence of the effect of GenAI products on educational outcomes does not yet exist. Therefore, and unfortunately, it is the consumer who carries the onus of appraising products. My recommendation is: use multiple means for assessing product effectiveness.

    2. [...]

   Oftentimes, there is a divide between what entrepreneurs build and educators need. For example, one shortcoming of the One Laptop Per Child program – an ambitious program that sought to put small, cheap but sturdy laptops in the hands of children from families of lesser means – is that the laptops were designed for idealized younger versions of the developers themselves, not so much the children who were actually using them.

  Initiatives have been implemented in which entrepreneurs and educators work together to improve educational technology products. Some products are developed with input from students and educators. Questions to ask vendors might be: In what ways were educators and learners included? How did their input influence the final product?

    3. What educational beliefs shape this product?

   Educational technology is rarely neutral. It is designed by people, and people have beliefs, experiences, ideologies and biases that shape the technologies they develop.

   It is important for educational technology products to rely on what educators have experienced as relevant to the students they meet in their real-life classes. Questions to ask include: What pedagogical principles guide this product? What particular learning does it support or discourage?

    4. Does the product level the playing field?

   Finally, people ought to ask how a product addresses educational inequities. Is this technology going to help reduce the learning gaps between different groups of learners? Or is it one that aids some learners – often those who are already successful or privileged – but not others? Is it adopting an asset-based or a deficit-based approach to addressing inequities?

   Educational technology vendors and startups may not have answers to all of these questions. But they should still be asked and considered. Answers could lead to improved products.

(George Veletsianos. https://theconversation.com, 15.04.24. Adaptado)

Leia o texto para responder à questão. 

AI tech products at schools and universities

    Every few years, an emerging technology shows up at the doorstep of schools and universities promising to transform education. The most recent? Technologies powered by generative artificial intelligence, also known as GenAI. These technologies are sold on the potential they hold for education. As optimistic as these visions of the future may be, the realities of educational technology over the past few decades have not lived up to their promises, as shown by rigorous investigations of technology after technology – from mechanical machines to computers, from mobile devices to massive open online courses.

    Yet, educational technology evangelists forget, remain unaware or simply do not care. Or they may be overly optimistic that the next new technology will be different than before.

    Here are four questions I believe should be answered before school officials purchase any technology that relies on AI.

    1. Is there evidence that a product works?

   Compelling evidence of the effect of GenAI products on educational outcomes does not yet exist. Therefore, and unfortunately, it is the consumer who carries the onus of appraising products. My recommendation is: use multiple means for assessing product effectiveness.

    2. [...]

   Oftentimes, there is a divide between what entrepreneurs build and educators need. For example, one shortcoming of the One Laptop Per Child program – an ambitious program that sought to put small, cheap but sturdy laptops in the hands of children from families of lesser means – is that the laptops were designed for idealized younger versions of the developers themselves, not so much the children who were actually using them.

  Initiatives have been implemented in which entrepreneurs and educators work together to improve educational technology products. Some products are developed with input from students and educators. Questions to ask vendors might be: In what ways were educators and learners included? How did their input influence the final product?

    3. What educational beliefs shape this product?

   Educational technology is rarely neutral. It is designed by people, and people have beliefs, experiences, ideologies and biases that shape the technologies they develop.

   It is important for educational technology products to rely on what educators have experienced as relevant to the students they meet in their real-life classes. Questions to ask include: What pedagogical principles guide this product? What particular learning does it support or discourage?

    4. Does the product level the playing field?

   Finally, people ought to ask how a product addresses educational inequities. Is this technology going to help reduce the learning gaps between different groups of learners? Or is it one that aids some learners – often those who are already successful or privileged – but not others? Is it adopting an asset-based or a deficit-based approach to addressing inequities?

   Educational technology vendors and startups may not have answers to all of these questions. But they should still be asked and considered. Answers could lead to improved products.

(George Veletsianos. https://theconversation.com, 15.04.24. Adaptado)

Leia o texto para responder à questão. 

AI tech products at schools and universities

    Every few years, an emerging technology shows up at the doorstep of schools and universities promising to transform education. The most recent? Technologies powered by generative artificial intelligence, also known as GenAI. These technologies are sold on the potential they hold for education. As optimistic as these visions of the future may be, the realities of educational technology over the past few decades have not lived up to their promises, as shown by rigorous investigations of technology after technology – from mechanical machines to computers, from mobile devices to massive open online courses.

    Yet, educational technology evangelists forget, remain unaware or simply do not care. Or they may be overly optimistic that the next new technology will be different than before.

    Here are four questions I believe should be answered before school officials purchase any technology that relies on AI.

    1. Is there evidence that a product works?

   Compelling evidence of the effect of GenAI products on educational outcomes does not yet exist. Therefore, and unfortunately, it is the consumer who carries the onus of appraising products. My recommendation is: use multiple means for assessing product effectiveness.

    2. [...]

   Oftentimes, there is a divide between what entrepreneurs build and educators need. For example, one shortcoming of the One Laptop Per Child program – an ambitious program that sought to put small, cheap but sturdy laptops in the hands of children from families of lesser means – is that the laptops were designed for idealized younger versions of the developers themselves, not so much the children who were actually using them.

  Initiatives have been implemented in which entrepreneurs and educators work together to improve educational technology products. Some products are developed with input from students and educators. Questions to ask vendors might be: In what ways were educators and learners included? How did their input influence the final product?

    3. What educational beliefs shape this product?

   Educational technology is rarely neutral. It is designed by people, and people have beliefs, experiences, ideologies and biases that shape the technologies they develop.

   It is important for educational technology products to rely on what educators have experienced as relevant to the students they meet in their real-life classes. Questions to ask include: What pedagogical principles guide this product? What particular learning does it support or discourage?

    4. Does the product level the playing field?

   Finally, people ought to ask how a product addresses educational inequities. Is this technology going to help reduce the learning gaps between different groups of learners? Or is it one that aids some learners – often those who are already successful or privileged – but not others? Is it adopting an asset-based or a deficit-based approach to addressing inequities?

   Educational technology vendors and startups may not have answers to all of these questions. But they should still be asked and considered. Answers could lead to improved products.

(George Veletsianos. https://theconversation.com, 15.04.24. Adaptado)

Leia o texto para responder à questão. 

AI tech products at schools and universities

    Every few years, an emerging technology shows up at the doorstep of schools and universities promising to transform education. The most recent? Technologies powered by generative artificial intelligence, also known as GenAI. These technologies are sold on the potential they hold for education. As optimistic as these visions of the future may be, the realities of educational technology over the past few decades have not lived up to their promises, as shown by rigorous investigations of technology after technology – from mechanical machines to computers, from mobile devices to massive open online courses.

    Yet, educational technology evangelists forget, remain unaware or simply do not care. Or they may be overly optimistic that the next new technology will be different than before.

    Here are four questions I believe should be answered before school officials purchase any technology that relies on AI.

    1. Is there evidence that a product works?

   Compelling evidence of the effect of GenAI products on educational outcomes does not yet exist. Therefore, and unfortunately, it is the consumer who carries the onus of appraising products. My recommendation is: use multiple means for assessing product effectiveness.

    2. [...]

   Oftentimes, there is a divide between what entrepreneurs build and educators need. For example, one shortcoming of the One Laptop Per Child program – an ambitious program that sought to put small, cheap but sturdy laptops in the hands of children from families of lesser means – is that the laptops were designed for idealized younger versions of the developers themselves, not so much the children who were actually using them.

  Initiatives have been implemented in which entrepreneurs and educators work together to improve educational technology products. Some products are developed with input from students and educators. Questions to ask vendors might be: In what ways were educators and learners included? How did their input influence the final product?

    3. What educational beliefs shape this product?

   Educational technology is rarely neutral. It is designed by people, and people have beliefs, experiences, ideologies and biases that shape the technologies they develop.

   It is important for educational technology products to rely on what educators have experienced as relevant to the students they meet in their real-life classes. Questions to ask include: What pedagogical principles guide this product? What particular learning does it support or discourage?

    4. Does the product level the playing field?

   Finally, people ought to ask how a product addresses educational inequities. Is this technology going to help reduce the learning gaps between different groups of learners? Or is it one that aids some learners – often those who are already successful or privileged – but not others? Is it adopting an asset-based or a deficit-based approach to addressing inequities?

   Educational technology vendors and startups may not have answers to all of these questions. But they should still be asked and considered. Answers could lead to improved products.

(George Veletsianos. https://theconversation.com, 15.04.24. Adaptado)

Leia o texto para responder à questão. 

AI tech products at schools and universities

    Every few years, an emerging technology shows up at the doorstep of schools and universities promising to transform education. The most recent? Technologies powered by generative artificial intelligence, also known as GenAI. These technologies are sold on the potential they hold for education. As optimistic as these visions of the future may be, the realities of educational technology over the past few decades have not lived up to their promises, as shown by rigorous investigations of technology after technology – from mechanical machines to computers, from mobile devices to massive open online courses.

    Yet, educational technology evangelists forget, remain unaware or simply do not care. Or they may be overly optimistic that the next new technology will be different than before.

    Here are four questions I believe should be answered before school officials purchase any technology that relies on AI.

    1. Is there evidence that a product works?

   Compelling evidence of the effect of GenAI products on educational outcomes does not yet exist. Therefore, and unfortunately, it is the consumer who carries the onus of appraising products. My recommendation is: use multiple means for assessing product effectiveness.

    2. [...]

   Oftentimes, there is a divide between what entrepreneurs build and educators need. For example, one shortcoming of the One Laptop Per Child program – an ambitious program that sought to put small, cheap but sturdy laptops in the hands of children from families of lesser means – is that the laptops were designed for idealized younger versions of the developers themselves, not so much the children who were actually using them.

  Initiatives have been implemented in which entrepreneurs and educators work together to improve educational technology products. Some products are developed with input from students and educators. Questions to ask vendors might be: In what ways were educators and learners included? How did their input influence the final product?

    3. What educational beliefs shape this product?

   Educational technology is rarely neutral. It is designed by people, and people have beliefs, experiences, ideologies and biases that shape the technologies they develop.

   It is important for educational technology products to rely on what educators have experienced as relevant to the students they meet in their real-life classes. Questions to ask include: What pedagogical principles guide this product? What particular learning does it support or discourage?

    4. Does the product level the playing field?

   Finally, people ought to ask how a product addresses educational inequities. Is this technology going to help reduce the learning gaps between different groups of learners? Or is it one that aids some learners – often those who are already successful or privileged – but not others? Is it adopting an asset-based or a deficit-based approach to addressing inequities?

   Educational technology vendors and startups may not have answers to all of these questions. But they should still be asked and considered. Answers could lead to improved products.

(George Veletsianos. https://theconversation.com, 15.04.24. Adaptado)