Gary Ackerman @garyackerman@qoto.org

Is it just me or does it seem “AI-powered investing advice” is probably snake oil… so it’s not unlike human-powered investing advice.

If you cannot accept being wrong, then teaching isn’t for you.

“Research proves….” No, actually it doesn’t.

If the video was recorded as a selfie in a car (or walking) with a single person speaking, you can be sure it’s not worth watching.

A Venn diagram of faculty who don’t read directions and those who complain students don’t read the syllabus is a single circle.

I understand the purpose of standards and objectives in education, but what if those who define them are wrong?

We make AI available for faculty, but not students.
Wait... what?

Critical thinking is a skill. If we don't practice it, we lose it.

I've been around long enough to know that technologies that will "change everything" usually don't.

Cognition is emotional. If we don't care about it, we won't learn it.

The skepticism of science and the skepticism of denialism are different.

"If I don't see it, then it isn't true" doesn't make you an empiricist.

When we do science, we question everything. This is why so many people are resistant.

Red herrings. So much work is wasted on red herrings.

"Let's do a survey" is a sure way to not find out what you want to know.

I have a few assignments in which I trust students when they tell me they did it. If they don’t, then they will struggle with later projects. I explain the rationale, but they are still confused that they don’t have to hand anything in.

STEM fields are related, but are fundamentally very different. Science explores nature as it exists. Technology and engineering control and apply natural phenomena. Math applies and explores patterns.

“Anyone who is drunk with gadgets is a menace.” -C. P. Snow

So many lofty sounding titles obscure the intent of the advocates.

I’ve worked in #edtech long enough to realize I should not recommend Google tools as they are likely to be abandoned.