The Agent I Wish My Students Had

 It is not a secret that I use AI, a lot. The most consistent use, though, is helping me manage all of my projects. I currently have over 15 research projects at different phases, from the idea stage through IRB, data collection, analysis, writing, and revising. I manage these projects and the next step in each using Claude, and I review them every Monday and Friday. On Monday I prioritize and set deadlines, and on Friday I update on progress.

This has changed my work significantly. Once a project makes its way into my AI workflow, I'm unlikely to forget it, and I am less haunted by the idea that I am forgetting something (what David Allen’s Getting Things Done calls open loops). It also allows me to have more projects, because I can manage more with my “digital brain.” Finally, AI helps me see which items I am ignoring. Right now I have a writing project about agency that has been dormant for 9 weeks, and my AI asked, is this still a project, or should I put it in a different category?

It reminded me of an idea Kathy Wilson and I discussed with the late Dave Brooks. At the time (over 20 years ago) he shared a writing support program he had created for students with learning disabilities. We put our heads together to see how we could improve it. The main idea was to develop a set of scaffolds for self-regulation of learning. The main challenge was are inability to have any meaningful way to differentiate for students and tailor it to the needs of the learner. The project never got off the ground, probably because both Dave and I had short attention spans and we just moved on. Now with AI agent in the mix I wonder if it is an idea worth revisiting

Screenshot of my Research Project Tracker

This weekend, I started thinking about how I manage my work against the backdrop of the rise of personal agents such as Meta’s Muse and OpenAI’s Dot. These agents are effective when they have context and access to our relevant data, including calendar, email, and other systems. It made me think that a good way to use AI for students would be a learning regulation agent. Imagine an agent that is connected to a student’s calendar, email (for messages from teachers and extracurriculars), and the LMS (learning management system) for assignment deadlines, tests, and even grades. That is the context the scaffolds Dave, Kathy, and I imagined never had.

The agent would be able to tell each student at the beginning of the week about major assignments and tests and help create a study plan, perhaps offering to create a practice test or index cards for studying. The possibilities are quite promising. For example, a teacher can give students 20 minutes on Monday to confer with their agent so they have an individualized learning plan for the week. On Friday, the agent can help students review what happened, which will help the agent understand what works for each student. Index cards may not help one student much, while practice quizzes with a timer really do.

In this way, each student would get occasional updates on which strategies work for them to accomplish goals, and be better prepared to meet challenges and plan well in the future. A scaffold is meant to come down, though. Two questions I am left with: first, how such an agent would hand the planning back to the student over time, or should we just assume that working with an AI agent to manage your study and work will be the way of the future; second, how do we make sure that the data is kept safely and without privacy concerns? 

Dashboarding and Self Regulation

I have two new devices in my life. The first is my iWatch bought last weekend in LA and the second is my Ford C-Max hybrid. I love both devices (and yes my car is a devices).  They both speak to my other devices and operate as part of my digital life.
Both have dashboard that are aimed at improving my behavior. the iWatch has an activity monitor that uses a very simple design to see if I am reaching my daily movement goals (exercise, standing, and walking). It is easily accessible through one tap on the face of the watch.

My hybrid has a dashboard that informs me how green is my my driving. It provides feedback on energy storing, breaking behavior and overall effective energy consumption. This has changed my behavior, at least in the short run. I am driving more cautiously and I am keenly aware of accelartaion and sudden stops.

I always knew that movement is good for me or that driving in a more even way would reduce fuel consumption. At the same time there quite a gap between knowing and acting on the knowledge. This is where the dashboards come to our rescue. Dashboards tell us how we do and give us formative feedback so we evaluate our performance in situ and even take corrective action. What I am less sure of is how long this effect will last. But if the dashboards create a lasting effect then it is worth thinking about the potential leverage in critical points in education.

I do not think that we can dashboard our whole life- it is simply too much to take in on a regular basis. But if we can identify critical practices that would be supported by a dashboard then we should at least attempt to that.

My idea is to start with device use for students. I can easily imagine an app that shows device use across 3-4 categories: Reading, Games, Social Media, Learning. A dashboard like that can easily show students how much of the time they are using different modes. This is especially important as we consider what might be a productive learning use of devices provided by schools.

Are Devices Eating your Students Brains?

Children's Games, 1560, Pieter Bruegel the Elder

Kristen Bailey recently shared this article:
Screentime Is Making Kids Moody, Crazy, and Lazy. Penned by Victoria Dunckley for Psychology Today the article discusses the evils of screen time. A moment of parental panic ensues as author attempt to sell her book through over-generalizations and fear. No parent wants her kids to be moody, crazy nor lazy.

Dr. Dunckley's work has a basis in fact, what concerns me is the overreaching sweeping statements. Screentime Is Making Kids Moody, Crazy and Lazy is such a better title than say: "Parents and kids need to be reasonable about screen time especially in the evenings". OR "Moderate balanced use of screen time can be a meaningful part of a healthy childhood.

The dire warning in Psychology Today is especially challenging given other stories about screen time and video games from the same publication. For example:

Cognitive Benefits of Playing Video Games by Peter Gray

7 Reasons to Play Video Games by Ryan Anderson

Video Gaming Can Increase Brain Size and Connectivity by Christopher Bergland

Dunckley's work emerges from reverse engineering of causes in cases she sees in her practice as a Psychiatrist.This kind of work excludes any ability to see normally behaving children and teens who have access to screen time. And, as I pointed out before, explosive titles sell books- because they prey on our base emotions, in this case, fear, combined with the tradition of screen bashing in the US. 

So, what should we as teachers do? Traditionally, we stay on the safe side, if we are not sure if something is dangerous we stay away from it. The problem with that approach is that it ignores the cost and risk in not engaging. In the case of screen time, the cost is that some students will emerge into the world of college and work without a solid footing in how to engage with digital technologies effectively. Without a reasonable capacity using digital technology students are at a disadvantage as citizens, workers, and consumers. I argue that we cannot afford to just turn it all off.

 what we should do is consider a few approaches:

1. Put reasonable limits around screen time. Devices are alluring, once they are in front of us it is hard to resist the urge to interact. As a result teachers and parents must establish clear rules about when device use is reasonable. In my class I ask my students to turn off sound notification, ring and dings of all kinds. In addition, there are times and activities in which devices are expected to be off. To prevent problems I often ask students to turn their devices upside down on the table or close the screen down.
2. Know your students/ children. Some students are more susceptible to the effects of screen time. As you use devices in your classroom, you will learn what the limitations of each student and design individual plans.
3. Model appropriate device hygiene. Students emulate our behavior. We need to model device hygiene by using similar guidelines to the ones we want kids to follow. If we check our device every minute or so it will be hard to expect our students to behave differently. For example, I discuss my strategy of leaving my phone in my office to allow me to teach without any interruptions. This kind of a metacognitive model (or think aloud) can help students reach self-regulation (#5).
4. Consider the feedback time. Different uses of devices create different feedback cycles. Quick feedback is very motivating but can desensitize students to stimuli. The trick is to include different kinds of feedback systems that do not over rely on quick feedback. For example, video games are often mentioned because of the immediate feedback and reward system. Some games, however, are not reliant on such a reward system- for example Minecraft.
5. Teach self-regulation. Self-regulation is the ability to manage behavior with minimal outside intervention. It limits disruptive behavior and impulsivity and makes sure that we think before we react. Devices make self-regulation harder- hence the need to teach it through modeling, practice, and feedback.

In short, I claim that the digital environment around us can be problematic BUT it does not follow that kids will be Moody, Crazy and Lazy. Instead, I argue that with thoughtful application students can learn to use devices to enhance their learning so they can be full citizens of the world.