todoELE

The dream: AI will exponentially enhance our productivity and creativity. It will optimize everything that can be optimized, freeing us humans up to do work that truly matters. It will lead to new breakthroughs in science, scale up mental health services, detect and cure cancer, and more. It will finally enable humanity to realize its full potential.

The nightmare: present and future harm. Estimates suggest AI will eliminate 300 million jobs worldwide, with 18 percent of work to be automated, over-proportionally affecting knowledge workers in advanced economies.

El director del Instituto Cervantes, Luis García Montero, viaja a Boston (Estados Unidos) para participar este jueves 27 en el 10º aniversario del Observatorio de la lengua española y las culturas hispánicas en los Estados Unidos. Ubicado en la Universidad de Harvard, es el único centro de la red del Cervantes dedicado principalmente a la labor de investigación sobre la situación de la lengua española en Estados Unidos, sus características y enseñanza; así como sobre las culturas españolas, hispanoamericanas e hispanas, y en especial de sus literaturas.

This week I spent a few days at the ASU/GSV conference and ran into 7,000 educators, entrepreneurs, and corporate training people who had gone CRAZY for AI.

No, I’m not kidding. This community, which makes up people like training managers, community college leaders, educators, and policymakers is absolutely freaked out about ChatGPT, Large Language Models, and all sorts of issues with AI. Now don’t get me wrong: I’m a huge fan of this. But the frenzy is unprecedented: this is bigger than the excitement at the launch of the i-Phone.

Over 300 years since the first written exam was used in the English education system, this traditional form of assessment continues to divide opinion.  To their supporters, written exams provide a rigorous test of students’ knowledge and understanding that acts as a source of motivation as well as a sound basis for progression onto university or employment. Indeed, Prime Ministers, Education Secretaries, Schools Ministers and regulators have publicly stated that written exams are the ‘best and fairest’ way to measure pupils’ attainment. Meanwhile, critics argue that written exams are narrow assessments that focus too much on memorisation and fail to provide students with the wide range of skills that they need for later life and work.