In the age of artificial intelligence, software can crunch numbers in a heartbeat and an agent can automate manual processes, but are they crunching the right numbers and automating the right processes?
To answer this question, we need to ensure the technology is solving the right things, and solving them right.
That’s the premise of a “super skill” that I identify via my article in eLearning Industry.
In this research study, strategy consultants who used GPT-4 as a tool to assist them with “inside the frontier” tasks (within the capability of AI) performed significantly better than their counterparts did in terms of quality and productivity.
Hence for such tasks, the authors called AI a quality and productivity booster.
However, those who used GPT-4 for “outside the frontier” tasks (beyond the capability of AI without extensive human guidance) performed significantly worse than their counterparts did in terms of correctness.
Hence for such tasks, the authors called AI a quality disruptor. (Though I’d be more inclined to call it an accuracy disruptor, as the “quality” of the users’ work was superior regardless of correctness.)
In the words of the authors, “Professionals who had a negative performance when using AI tended to blindly adopt its output and interrogate it less”. My inference is that the inside-the-frontier users may have behaved similarly, but because the AI was up to the task they got away with it. For something more complicated, they came unstuck.
OK, but that was just an experiment. Could it happen in real life? You bet.
“I now realise that AI can generate authoritative-sounding output that can be incorrect, incomplete or biased” wrote a professor at Macquarie University on behalf of a group of academics who made a false submission to a parliamentary inquiry!
Given the frontier of AI capability is ever shifting, we’ll never be certain at any point in time whether a given task lay inside or outside it. So as users of the technology we need to maintain a critical mindset.
In other words, use artificial intelligence to augment your human intelligence, rather than replace it.
The Learning Circuits Big Question for this month is:
If you peer inside an organization in 10 years time and you look at how workplace learning is being supported by that organization, what will you see?
To answer this question, I’ve organised my own two cents’ worth under six major banners…
1. The responsibility for e-learning development will decentralise across the organisation.
In 10 years’ time, I believe organisations will rely less on external development houses to produce e-learning solutions, and instead bring more – if not all – of it in-house.
Of course this is already happening; however, it’s usually associated with the appointment of a specialist “E-Learning Team”. While such a team may fill a gap in the short term, it’s akin to appointing a Photocopier Operating Team, a Word Document Authoring Team, a Google Searching Team and an Email Sending Team. While all of these technologies were novel at one time or another, everyone has since learned to integrate them into their day-to-day activities.
E-Learning development should be no different. My view is that it’s unsustainable for a specialised E-Learning Team to remain responsible, in the long term, for developing all of the e-learning solutions for everyone in the organisation. Soon enough they’ll get swamped, their turn-around times will lag, and their colleagues will start to say silly things like “e-learning doesn’t work”.
It makes more sense to me to train the organisation’s Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) in rapid e-learning authoring. Then, whenever a learning need arises, the SME has both the knowledge and the skills to develop their own e-learning solution, quickly and effectively.
Sure, the interactivity of the e-learning that is produced by the SMEs will take a short-term hit. However, that should change over time as their confidence and experience grows with using these tools. I’m sure you’re better with Word now than when you first started?
Of course, the support and guidance of qualified e-learning coaches will be crucial during this transition period.
2. E-Learning will shift from instructivism towards constructivism and connectivism.
In a previous article, I said that workplace learning has thankfully become more constructivist and even connectivist over time. I think in 10 years’ time it will be even more so.
A driver of this shift will be people power. As staff familiarise themselves with blogs, wikis, RSS, YouTube and Twitter, and as more tech-savvy Gen-Y’s & Z’s join the organisation, the demand for self-paced, self-directed learning will accelerate.
Couple that with the increasing demand for e-learning more generally across the organisation, and no one will be able to afford the time and effort to prepare perfectly pre-defined, pre-packaged content for all occasions. Something’s gotta give; open it up to Web 2.0.
I still maintain that instructivism will remain relevant in the digital age. However, with less hand holding from a “teacher”, meta‑learning (or learning how to learn) will become an increasingly important skill set.
3. Staff will collaborate and share knowledge.
The shift towards constructivism and connectivism will demand organisation-wide collaboration and peer-to-peer knowledge sharing, facilitated by blogs, wikis, discussion forums and other online media.
Single-point sensitive gurus are a liability; everyone has the obligation to share their knowledge with everyone else. This might seem a lofty or even altruistic notion, but the principles of Wikinomics tell us that the organisations whose staff don’t do this won’t be able to compete effectively in the marketplace.
This shift will be accompanied by formal acknowledgements of informal learning. Sure, you can learn something anywhere, but the organisation still needs to be confident of your capability. Insert summative online assessments here.
4. Learning will be fully networked.
As the virtual workplace gains in popularity, more and more people will be working from home, in different cities and different countries.
Virtual classrooms will be the norm for centralising everyone in the one space, while emerging technologies such as virtual worlds and holograms will also bridge the geographical divide.
5. M-Learning will be popular.
Ragan reported recently that only 10% of Americans use their cell phones to access the web daily. My gut tells me this statistic is reflected right across the corporate sector.
However, advances in mobile technology and connectivity, coupled with the business world’s shift towards cloud computing, will eventually render the cell phone an indispensable learning and working tool.
Why? Because everything will be online. Why wouldn’t you use your phone to get it if you needed it?!
6. E-Learning will be smart.
Finally, while many technological advances will continue to improve knowledge distribution, it’s on another plane to personalise it so that it’s relevant to the individual learner. I think we’re just seeing the beginnings of artificial intelligence and the dawn of the semantic web.
So, do you agree with my predictions?
How do you see workplace learning in 10 years’ time?
Over the weekend, AMP added a virtual assistant to its website. Her name is Sam and she’s a CyberTwin.
In a nutshell, a CyberTwin is an avatar that’s powered by AI to chat to real humans. In AMP’s case, Sam has been designed to answer customers’ questions about bank accounts and superannuation.
The short answer is “yes”.
According to MyCyberTwin (Dec 2008)…
CyberTeachers are endlessly patient, and have endless depth of knowledge. They can be trained to offer structured support to learn how to use a new piece of technology, bring life to learning content, and chat to thousands of people simultaneously for hours at a time. Our multi-lingual robots help visitors practice their English skills.
And yes, CyberTwins can be deployed into Second Life.
E-Learning Provocateur 