(This is my sixteenth post in a series of entries I’m using to participate in Blaugust for 2026.)
It turns out that AI use can get expensive, and when you expect those under you to use the expensive things more and more, you start realizing how wasteful that is.
One could draw parallels to school level high-stakes testing. We talk a lot about “teaching to the test” like it’s a bad thing, but very little is done about it because those tests are how we measure student success.
If those in charge (we’re talking politicians and those appointed by them, here) thought teaching to the test was actually bad, they wouldn’t make the test so darned important.
In a recent post on this very site, I mentioned that until recently the big event for digital media arts programs in my district is a district-wide Film Festival. It’s still seen as the biggest thing, with more pomp and circumstance pumped into that than most events.
This, in spite of the push to cover the other aspects of digital media covered in our curriculum. It’s slow going, in part, I think, because the big prize is for video production, not the other things.
We have other awards, now, an I welcome the improvements. Inertia’s a pain sometimes, though.
I think about stuff like this when I’m writing my rubrics. What’s that particular project’s big thing? If that’s not the part getting most of the instructional time, why not?
And if I don’t like the results I’m getting, what do I need to change? How much needs to be changed, and how do I present those changes to my students?