有趣灵魂说
纽约市公立学校近日发布了首份教师人工智能应用指南，为全美最大学区近1600所学校明确划定AI使用“红线”。这份长达30页的手册采用交通灯式规则：绿色区域允许AI辅助教案构思与研究，黄色区域需谨慎处理敏感沟通，红色区域严禁用于学生纪律处分与成绩评定。在技术浪潮与教育伦理的博弈中，这份指南试图为教师和学生建立清晰的安全护栏。
译文为原创，仅供个人学习使用
The New York Times ｜纽约时报
New York City Teachers Get Road Map for Using A.I. in Classroom
纽约市教师获课堂教学人工智能应用指南
Research and lesson plans, sure. Discipline or grades? Prohibited.
用于研究和教案设计，可以。用于纪律处分或评分？禁止。
By MATTHEW HAAG
在纽约市的公立学校中，教师可以使用人工智能来构思教案。他们也被鼓励运用人工智能进行研究和起草部分文件。但绝不能使用人工智能来决定对学生的纪律处分，或为作业和考试评定成绩。
以上这些关于人工智能应如何、不应如何被教师使用的示例，都包含在纽约市学校系统于周二发布的首版人工智能应用手册中。该学校系统是美国最大的公立学校系统，拥有近1600所学校。
这份指南是在纽约市课堂建立人工智能使用规则和保障措施方面迈出的重要的第一步，预示着该市将更大规模地接纳这项技术，包括可能创建一所专注于人工智能领域的高中。
在纽约市发布这份指南之前，全美其他一些大型学区——包括芝加哥、丹佛以及北卡罗来纳州的夏洛特-梅克伦堡学区——在过去18个月里也发布了各自的人工智能应用手册。俄亥俄州等一些州则制定了全州范围内学校使用人工智能的规则。
"我们知道学校里已经在发生什么，那就是我们的学生和教师都在使用人工智能，"纽约市学校校长卡马尔·萨缪尔斯在接受采访时说。"我们必须确保有强有力的防护措施，保障我们年轻人的安全，并保护对我们家庭至关重要的数据隐私。"
随着人工智能吸引了公众的注意力，其创造者将其宣传为对人们生活根本性的重塑——尤其是在利润丰厚的教育行业——美国各地的学校领导者一直在努力解决一个问题：人工智能在课堂上应占多大比重？一些人拥抱它，认为它将带来积极的变革。另一些人则认为它会抑制批判性思维和理解能力，并助长作弊行为。
麻省理工学院副教授贾斯汀·赖希表示，随着这项技术变得更加强大和普及，各个学区有必要为教师和学生使用它提供指导。但他表示，这样做时应认识到，人工智能是一项新兴技术，其能力和工具在未来几年乃至几十年内都将发生巨大演变。
"从历史上看，当我们试图猜测使用新技术的最佳方式时，我们常常是错的，"曾参与编写《学校人工智能指南》一书的赖希先生说。"有很多人会站出来说，'这是我们需要做的，这是最佳实践，'而他们其实是在凭空捏造。"
到目前为止，纽约市公立学校的教师们基本是在自行设定使用人工智能的条件。有些人尝试用它来设计教案或起草电子邮件。其他人则避而远之。一些教师，尤其是那些抓到学生利用人工智能作弊的教师，对学校领导层缺乏更明确的规定感到沮丧。
这份手册发布之际，一些纽约市的家长正敦促学校领导推迟任何人工智能的推广，直到为教师和学生制定出更严格的指导方针。
这本30页的指南提供了对人工智能的基础性理解，并阐述了该技术在何时不被接受、何时应谨慎使用、何时可被视为有用工具。其示例以交通信号灯的形式呈现：红色（禁止）、黄色（谨慎进行）和绿色（可行！）。
该指南提醒教师，人工智能应支持他们的工作，但绝不能取而代之，并且他们应谨慎输入学生的私人信息。学校领导承认，这项技术对社会和学生的长期影响——对他们思维和学习方式的影响——尚未被完全理解。
虽然这份文件主要面向教师，但它也为学生提供了一个可接受使用方式的示例。学生可以就研究和课题探讨咨询人工智能，但教师应检查其回复的准确性、适当性和偏见。
"我们的学生不需要为了技术而技术，"手册中写道。"他们需要精准的指导、有意义的练习，以及足够了解他们的成年人，由这些成年人来决定人工智能何时适合融入他们的学习，何时不适合。"
对于教师而言，手册中有明确的例子说明何时禁止使用该技术。例如，不应使用人工智能来为残疾学生制定专门的学习计划。
但教师可以使用它来起草敏感的沟通文书——前提是谨慎行事。
完全可接受的做法是：将人工智能用作向导或探讨伙伴。
教师被鼓励使用人工智能来寻找教授课题的不同方法，以及在诸如日程安排和翻译等常规性任务上获得协助。即便如此，他们也被告知要运用自己的专业判断，因为这项技术容易产生"幻觉"——即生成错误信息，包括经常以非常自信的口吻引用并不存在的来源。
在未来几个月里，学校领导将举办公开活动，就新规定收集反馈和建议，并将其纳入将于6月发布的更新版指南中。
乔治·华盛顿大学教育与人类发展研究生院副院长娜塔莉·米尔曼表示，纽约市的学校必须为教师提供培训和发展机会，以帮助他们更好地理解人工智能。在与全美各地教师的交流中，米尔曼博士表示，这项技术是一个两极分化的；有人厌恶它，有人每天都用它，还有许多观点介于两者之间。
"仍然有许多教师并不完全理解什么是人工智能，或者它能够做什么，"她说。"即使他们在使用它，也可能没有完全领会或理解它在教学上的应用方式。"◾
In New York City schools, teachers can use artificial intelligence to generate ideas for lesson plans. They are also encouraged to deploy it for research and drafting some documents. But it should never be used to determine disciplinary action against a student or to assign grades to homework or tests.
Those examples of how artificial intelligence should or should not be used by teachers across New York City’s nearly 1,600 public schools are laid out in an initial A.I. playbook released on Tuesday by the school system, which is the country’s largest.
The guidance represents the first major step in establishing ground rules and safeguards for artificial intelligence in New York City classrooms, in what is shaping up to be a larger embrace of the technology, including the possible creation of an A.I.-focused high school.
The city’s guidance comes after some other large districts across the country — including Chicago, Denver and Charlotte-Mecklenburg in North Carolina — have released their own A.I. playbooks during the past 18 months. Some states, such as Ohio, have statewide rules on A.I. in schools.
“We know what is happening in our schools already, which is A.I. is being used by our students and by teachers,” Kamar Samuels, the New York City schools chancellor, said in an interview. “We have to make sure that we have strong guardrails, safety for our young people and data privacy that’s critically important to our families.”
As artificial intelligence has captured the public’s attention and its creators have marketed it as a fundamental reshaping of people’s lives, particularly in the lucrative industry of education, school leaders across the United States have grappled with how much of it belongs in classrooms. Some have embraced it, believing it will be transformational in a positive way. Others argue that it inhibits critical thinking and comprehension, and encourages cheating.
Justin Reich, an associate professor at M.I.T., said that as the technology has become more powerful and ubiquitous, it is necessary for districts to provide guidance for its use by teachers and students. But it should be done with the understanding that artificial intelligence is a nascent
technology whose abilities and tools will evolve greatly in the coming years and decades, he said.
“Historically, when we try to guess the best ways of using new technologies, we’re often wrong,”said Mr. Reich, who helped write a guidebook, “A Guide to A.I. in Schools.” “There are lots of people who are out there who will say, ‘This is what we need to do, this is best practice,’ and they’re making stuff up.”
Until now, teachers across the city’s public schools have largely set their own terms for using artificial intelligence. Some have dabbled with it to create lesson plan or draft emails. Others have avoided it. Some teachers, especially those who have caught students using it to cheat, have been frustrated by the lack of clearer rules from school leaders.
The playbook also lands at a time when some New York City parents are urging school leaders to postpone any rollout of A.I. until more rigorous guidelines for teachers and students emerge.
The 30-page guide provides a foundational understanding of artificial intelligence and explains when the technology is not acceptable, when it should be used with caution and when it should be considered a helpful tool. Examples are presented like a stop light: red (prohibited), yellow (proceed with caution) and green (go ahead!).
The guidebook reminds teachers that artificial intelligence should support their work but never replace it and that they should be careful about entering students’ private information. School leaders acknowledge that the technology’s long-term impact on society and students — on how they think and learn — isn’t fully understood.
While the document is intended for teachers, it offers an example for students on an acceptable use. They can consult with A.I. for research and exploring topics, but teachers should check the responses for accuracy, appropriateness and bias.
“Our students do not need technology for its own sake,” the playbook says. “They need accurate instruction, meaningful practice and adults who know them well enough to decide when A.I. belongs in their learning, and when it does not.”
For teachers, there are clear examples of when the technology is prohibited. It should not be consulted for crafting specialized learning plans for students with disabilities.
But teachers can use it to draft sensitive communication — if they tread carefully.
What’s fully acceptable: engaging with artificial intelligence as a guide or sounding board.
Teachers are encouraged to use it to find different ways to teach topics, as well as get assistance
with rote tasks such as scheduling and translation. Even then, they are urged to use their own professional judgment because the technology tends to hallucinate — the phenomenon of producing incorrect information, including citing, often with great confidence, sources that do not exist.
During the coming months, school leaders will hold public events to receive feedback and recommendations about the new rules, and incorporate that into an updated guide to be released in June.
Natalie Milman, associate dean of the Graduate School of Education and Human Development at
George Washington University, said that it would be imperative for New York City schools to provide training and development for teachers to better understand A.I. In conversations with teachers across the United States, Dr. Milman said that the technology was a polarizing topic; some despise it while others use it every day, with a lot of views in between.
“There are still many teachers who don’t fully understand what A.I. is, or what it’s capable of doing,” she said. “Even if they’re using it, they may not fully comprehend or understand ways that it can be used pedagogically.”
