Demonstrates some very thoughtful teaching! Maybe the best we can all hope for is for writers and researchers to be more critical of what they’re getting from Google and other AI programs
If we’re all going to be using AI tools to search, we better understand how it works. There are some real opportunities, but you have to understand the limitations of the models as well.
I'm always wonderfully challenged to broaden my thinking when I read your work and this post was no exception. Thanks for starting off the year with your students with such thoughtful lessons.
However, there was one thing that I've been thinking about a great deal and one of your last notions in this post brought it home. It was the section on dealing with "Distractions". How often do we question the notion that what the teacher has decided is important for students really IS important and that anything (phones, peers, etc) that draw students away from what the teacher has decided is important is, by definition, a distraction. What if our carefully planned instruction is actually the distraction in the student's day? We seem to display very little faith in our students' evolving maturity when we refuse to give them the opportunity to pursue what they may be interested in. We've systematically burned the curiosity out of them to the point where they don't even bother to wonder deeply anymore. Their natural curiosity is no longer a distraction in our classrooms--sadly. I have already seen enough of you in your writing to sense that you are truly a wonderful teacher and I have no doubt that whether a student was interested in entrepreneurship, economics, history, robotics, or anything else you could help them deepen their understanding and excitement while weaving in and encouraging them to explore the topic through literature or mathematics or biology. By helping them weave their own world together with strands from every discipline, we help them focus and understand that everything is an opportunity for learning.
Stephen’s first-week reflections on teaching with AI reminded me why scaffolding questions—and keeping writing sacred—will matter more than ever this decade.
Stephen, your heartfelt post about week one hits home—I was a high school teacher too, and I feel the weight of navigating AI’s role in the classroom. Your insight that ChatGPT is the new Google is spot-on; it’s the default now, and your push for AI literacy is inspiring. The “richest person” exercise brilliantly exposes how students take AI answers at face value, sparking critical conversations. And your school’s cell phone ban is a game-changer—more presence sets the stage for real thinking.
One thought to extend your approach: expecting students to pause and unpack assumptions (like state treasuries vs. private wealth) might be tough at first. High schoolers need scaffolding to ask those deeper questions. You might guide them explicitly by prompting the AI with, “How do you calculate wealth across eras?” or “Show your sources,” and then compare results with a primary source. That keeps your SIFT method alive while teaching them to interrogate the muse iteratively.
Looking ahead, the next decade really is about mastering information: accessing it, verifying it, and integrating it. I love your emphasis on writing as sacred. Pairing AI with unified essays or short answers could help students practice coherence, scope, and progression—and then push them to test their thesis against valid counterarguments. That’s falsifiability in action—a skill worth building into every rubric. Even a simple journal reflection on the “richest person” search—what did the AI miss?—builds ownership and critical thinking.
You’re blazing a trail for AI-literate thinkers, and this post proves the work matters. Keep it up!
Thanks, Richard. Of course the follow up to seeing what happens when AI is so confident is the whole point - this is for a year long independent research class, so there is plenty of time for scaffolding. Reflections on each of these activities is also a key part of the process.
Thanks for the comment. But here's my larger point - I am really not "incorporating" it at all. Google is AI! If you use Google, you use AI every day, even the folks who can't stand it. If you actually enter AI mode, you have access to Gemini and can do all sorts of follow ups just as though you were in any other chatbot. So even kids who don't go to ChatGPT (which they all do anyway), are using AI by default. My biggest observation is that it's just a normal technology for students at this point. They have shot so far past the discussion but most educators are still on the defensive.
You're absolutely right. It's baked into Google searches now. And you really do have to look at the sources it brings up because some of them are very surface-level blog post stuff. And sometimes you have to dig pretty deep to get more expert content.
But you're absolutely right. People saying they're opting out of using AI - I'm just not sure how that's even possible anymore. And at some point, it won't even be a question.
True, but if we are to reach students where they are developmentally, we need to use their language. To them dumb is their expression of what they don’t want to be. So it’s our job as educators to teach them what that actually means BY showing them how AI can’t reason, think, or come up with new ideas.
This would really be a good place to show just how “dumb” AI is. Students “don’t want to be dumb”, and making it explicitly clear how AI doesn’t think, and is really another form of a search engine, is likely the best outcome form this lesson. I hope you reinforced that with your students. As with all intelligence, a good amount of skepticism is necessary!
Demonstrates some very thoughtful teaching! Maybe the best we can all hope for is for writers and researchers to be more critical of what they’re getting from Google and other AI programs
If we’re all going to be using AI tools to search, we better understand how it works. There are some real opportunities, but you have to understand the limitations of the models as well.
I'm always wonderfully challenged to broaden my thinking when I read your work and this post was no exception. Thanks for starting off the year with your students with such thoughtful lessons.
However, there was one thing that I've been thinking about a great deal and one of your last notions in this post brought it home. It was the section on dealing with "Distractions". How often do we question the notion that what the teacher has decided is important for students really IS important and that anything (phones, peers, etc) that draw students away from what the teacher has decided is important is, by definition, a distraction. What if our carefully planned instruction is actually the distraction in the student's day? We seem to display very little faith in our students' evolving maturity when we refuse to give them the opportunity to pursue what they may be interested in. We've systematically burned the curiosity out of them to the point where they don't even bother to wonder deeply anymore. Their natural curiosity is no longer a distraction in our classrooms--sadly. I have already seen enough of you in your writing to sense that you are truly a wonderful teacher and I have no doubt that whether a student was interested in entrepreneurship, economics, history, robotics, or anything else you could help them deepen their understanding and excitement while weaving in and encouraging them to explore the topic through literature or mathematics or biology. By helping them weave their own world together with strands from every discipline, we help them focus and understand that everything is an opportunity for learning.
I feel pretty confident that the phones are a distraction :) but I get your point.
Stephen’s first-week reflections on teaching with AI reminded me why scaffolding questions—and keeping writing sacred—will matter more than ever this decade.
Stephen, your heartfelt post about week one hits home—I was a high school teacher too, and I feel the weight of navigating AI’s role in the classroom. Your insight that ChatGPT is the new Google is spot-on; it’s the default now, and your push for AI literacy is inspiring. The “richest person” exercise brilliantly exposes how students take AI answers at face value, sparking critical conversations. And your school’s cell phone ban is a game-changer—more presence sets the stage for real thinking.
One thought to extend your approach: expecting students to pause and unpack assumptions (like state treasuries vs. private wealth) might be tough at first. High schoolers need scaffolding to ask those deeper questions. You might guide them explicitly by prompting the AI with, “How do you calculate wealth across eras?” or “Show your sources,” and then compare results with a primary source. That keeps your SIFT method alive while teaching them to interrogate the muse iteratively.
Looking ahead, the next decade really is about mastering information: accessing it, verifying it, and integrating it. I love your emphasis on writing as sacred. Pairing AI with unified essays or short answers could help students practice coherence, scope, and progression—and then push them to test their thesis against valid counterarguments. That’s falsifiability in action—a skill worth building into every rubric. Even a simple journal reflection on the “richest person” search—what did the AI miss?—builds ownership and critical thinking.
You’re blazing a trail for AI-literate thinkers, and this post proves the work matters. Keep it up!
Thanks, Richard. Of course the follow up to seeing what happens when AI is so confident is the whole point - this is for a year long independent research class, so there is plenty of time for scaffolding. Reflections on each of these activities is also a key part of the process.
I like how you're incorporating it in class from day one because they are using it. To pretend that they're not is just wishful thinking.
It makes me wonder what junior high and high school are going to look like in ten years when you have kids that have grown up with LLMs.
Thanks for the comment. But here's my larger point - I am really not "incorporating" it at all. Google is AI! If you use Google, you use AI every day, even the folks who can't stand it. If you actually enter AI mode, you have access to Gemini and can do all sorts of follow ups just as though you were in any other chatbot. So even kids who don't go to ChatGPT (which they all do anyway), are using AI by default. My biggest observation is that it's just a normal technology for students at this point. They have shot so far past the discussion but most educators are still on the defensive.
You're absolutely right. It's baked into Google searches now. And you really do have to look at the sources it brings up because some of them are very surface-level blog post stuff. And sometimes you have to dig pretty deep to get more expert content.
But you're absolutely right. People saying they're opting out of using AI - I'm just not sure how that's even possible anymore. And at some point, it won't even be a question.
This is great. Every teacher in America needs to read this. Keep it up
Thanks, Bob. We'll see.
True, but if we are to reach students where they are developmentally, we need to use their language. To them dumb is their expression of what they don’t want to be. So it’s our job as educators to teach them what that actually means BY showing them how AI can’t reason, think, or come up with new ideas.
This would really be a good place to show just how “dumb” AI is. Students “don’t want to be dumb”, and making it explicitly clear how AI doesn’t think, and is really another form of a search engine, is likely the best outcome form this lesson. I hope you reinforced that with your students. As with all intelligence, a good amount of skepticism is necessary!
Agreed, but I’m not sure “dumb” and “smart” is the best way to frame it. What’s it doing? How does it work? That’s the literacy part.
Bookmarking this for my department. Your piece gave me a practical mantra: Ban distraction, teach judgment, design for depth. I’m in.