Strongly relating with the first section on critical thinking on AI use.
On a recent saturday, my team (learning designers) planned an AI toolkit upgradation session. We had been using AI avidly since over a year and the intention was to evolve how we integrate AI into our learning design process, based on recent advancements and newly launched tools.
However, the session soon pivoted and we ended up talking about the joylessness of using AI for over 2 hours. How the sense of accomplishment was lesser. How the work was more. How looking at each version critically was so much more draining that working on it ourselves. As experts, eventually you end up changing most of what AI gives as the first draft. And while this may be okay for simple writing tasks. But for complex curriculum design tasks, its just insanely draining. And so dissatisfying!
Thank you for sharing this Shreya. I am so glad this resonated. I hear you! There's a better way to use it which shouldn't come at the cost or joy, passion, creativity and time.
Good of you to bring up a very genuine problem of how using AI doesn't brings the same joy as when you work alone with your human capacity.
The need for critical review, finding meaning and joy, revisiting how output from AI tools can actually reduce additional work and maintaining state of energy are all indicators of how your relationship is with the tools and their purpose.
Maybe, a reflection session within the team can help reframe the relationship with AI tools and the team could find the steps involved using AI tools as engaging as pre AI era.
Yes we did that and the new thumb rule (for us) is to be quick to give up on AI. We realised that the brain devolves into chasing the perfect prompt to get to the perfect response as a reward. Now we disengage quickly and take over the creation process.
Another change - we arent relying on AI to create the first draft of a rough idea. We realised that was putting us in a passive state of scrolling and reviewing, not of actively creating, thus contributing to the joylessness. :)
I really like your point about not relying on AI to create the first draft. It reminded me of several occasions when I've had a germ of an idea that I wanted AI to help me expand. To do this, I tried to explain the idea to the AI, as clearly as possible, in a paragraph or so. Interestingly, I think those efforts to write a clear "first draft" were the most personally beneficial part of the exercise, because they helped me flesh out the idea for myself.
My most important discovery about working with genAI about a year and a half ago was that we need to do the work of ‘externalising’ what is scattered inside our brain. Sometimes these are ideas and sometimes this is years of knowledge on a certain subject.
Now the realisation is that sometimes alll the thoughtful articulation in the world will also not be enough for AI to produce a perfect outcome. BUT that articulation in itself is so useful.
Strongly relating with the first section on critical thinking on AI use.
On a recent saturday, my team (learning designers) planned an AI toolkit upgradation session. We had been using AI avidly since over a year and the intention was to evolve how we integrate AI into our learning design process, based on recent advancements and newly launched tools.
However, the session soon pivoted and we ended up talking about the joylessness of using AI for over 2 hours. How the sense of accomplishment was lesser. How the work was more. How looking at each version critically was so much more draining that working on it ourselves. As experts, eventually you end up changing most of what AI gives as the first draft. And while this may be okay for simple writing tasks. But for complex curriculum design tasks, its just insanely draining. And so dissatisfying!
Thank you for sharing this Shreya. I am so glad this resonated. I hear you! There's a better way to use it which shouldn't come at the cost or joy, passion, creativity and time.
Good of you to bring up a very genuine problem of how using AI doesn't brings the same joy as when you work alone with your human capacity.
The need for critical review, finding meaning and joy, revisiting how output from AI tools can actually reduce additional work and maintaining state of energy are all indicators of how your relationship is with the tools and their purpose.
Maybe, a reflection session within the team can help reframe the relationship with AI tools and the team could find the steps involved using AI tools as engaging as pre AI era.
Yes we did that and the new thumb rule (for us) is to be quick to give up on AI. We realised that the brain devolves into chasing the perfect prompt to get to the perfect response as a reward. Now we disengage quickly and take over the creation process.
Another change - we arent relying on AI to create the first draft of a rough idea. We realised that was putting us in a passive state of scrolling and reviewing, not of actively creating, thus contributing to the joylessness. :)
I really like your point about not relying on AI to create the first draft. It reminded me of several occasions when I've had a germ of an idea that I wanted AI to help me expand. To do this, I tried to explain the idea to the AI, as clearly as possible, in a paragraph or so. Interestingly, I think those efforts to write a clear "first draft" were the most personally beneficial part of the exercise, because they helped me flesh out the idea for myself.
So true Jim!
Big yes Jim.
My most important discovery about working with genAI about a year and a half ago was that we need to do the work of ‘externalising’ what is scattered inside our brain. Sometimes these are ideas and sometimes this is years of knowledge on a certain subject.
Now the realisation is that sometimes alll the thoughtful articulation in the world will also not be enough for AI to produce a perfect outcome. BUT that articulation in itself is so useful.