Because agents have memory and can be guided and corrected in conversation, they get better as teams use them.
大多数人可能认为 AI 工具的改进主要依赖于开发者,但作者强调 agents 的记忆和对话指导能力,使得它们在使用过程中不断改进。
Because agents have memory and can be guided and corrected in conversation, they get better as teams use them.
大多数人可能认为 AI 工具的改进主要依赖于开发者,但作者强调 agents 的记忆和对话指导能力,使得它们在使用过程中不断改进。
However, there is skepticism about AI’s ability to replace human teaching in activities such as judging writing style, and some have expressed concern that policy makers could use AI to justify replacing (young) human labor.
Maha describes here the primary concern I have with the pursuit of both AI and adaptive technologies in education. Not that the designers of such tools are attempting to replace human interaction, but that the spread of "robotic" educational tools will accelerate the drive to further reduce human-powered teaching and learning, leading perhaps to class-based divisions in educational experiences like Maha imagines here.
AI and adaptive tool designers often say that they are hoping their technologies will free up time for human teachers to focus on more impactful educational practices. However, we already see how technologies that reduce human labor often lead to further reductions the use of human teachers — not their increase. As Maha points out, that's a social and economic issue, not a technology issue. If we focus on building tools rather than revalorizing human-powered education, I fear we are accelerating the devaluation of education already taking place.