Comment Oops...title should end with 'for Kids' (Score 1) 1
Amazon Vine Review Recasts 'Coding Kids' Exposé as Learn-to-Code Primer for Kids
Submission + - Amazon Vine Review Recasts 'Coding Kids' Exposé as Learn-to-Code Primer for 1
theodp writes: "Amazon Vine," the e-tailer explains, "is an invitation-only program which selects the most insightful reviewers in the Amazon store to serve as Vine Voices. Vine Voices have the unique opportunity to order items free of charge and share their product experiences with Amazon customers to help them make informed buying decisions. [...] When customers see a review with the special Vine badge, they can trust that they're getting an honest, unbiased opinion from a real customer just like them."
So, how well does the reality live up to the promise? In the case of the new book Coding Kids: Big Tech's Battle to Remake Public Schools, not so much. Described by the publisher as "the inside story of how Big Tech catalyzed, co-opted, and ultimately came to capture computer science and AI education in America" ("Fourth graders doing Google-branded coding lessons. Amazon schooling seventh graders on its warehouse robots. Advanced Placement computing courses from Microsoft and Apple."), the top review selected by Amazon informs customers that the book is a 'good introduction to coding.'
"I really enjoyed Coding Kids," writes the 'trusted' Amazon Vine reviewer. "What stood out to me most was how the book takes something that can sound complicated—computer coding—and makes it feel approachable and even fun. As I was reading it, I found myself thinking that this is exactly the kind of book that could help a child become interested in technology without feeling overwhelmed by it. I particularly liked the way it encourages kids to be curious, experiment, and solve problems on their own. That was probably my favorite part because it shows that coding isn’t just about computers—it’s also about creativity and learning how to think differently. I would definitely recommend Coding Kids to parents, grandparents, or teachers looking for a good introduction to coding. I came away from the book thinking that it could genuinely spark a child’s interest in technology and give them the confidence to explore something new."
While likely just another example of Hanlon's Razor ("Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity."), the recasting of an investigative nonfiction book that casts a critical eye at Amazon's influence on K-12 education as a learn-to-code primer for children doesn't exactly instill trust in the Amazon Vine program or Amazon's 'Top Reviews' selection process. More on-point book reviews of Coding Kids can be found at the Washington Independent Review of Books ("Turns out, Silicon Valley isn’t especially altruistic.") and Science ("Big Tech’s crusade to get kids coding is more self-interested than it first appears").
So, how well does the reality live up to the promise? In the case of the new book Coding Kids: Big Tech's Battle to Remake Public Schools, not so much. Described by the publisher as "the inside story of how Big Tech catalyzed, co-opted, and ultimately came to capture computer science and AI education in America" ("Fourth graders doing Google-branded coding lessons. Amazon schooling seventh graders on its warehouse robots. Advanced Placement computing courses from Microsoft and Apple."), the top review selected by Amazon informs customers that the book is a 'good introduction to coding.'
"I really enjoyed Coding Kids," writes the 'trusted' Amazon Vine reviewer. "What stood out to me most was how the book takes something that can sound complicated—computer coding—and makes it feel approachable and even fun. As I was reading it, I found myself thinking that this is exactly the kind of book that could help a child become interested in technology without feeling overwhelmed by it. I particularly liked the way it encourages kids to be curious, experiment, and solve problems on their own. That was probably my favorite part because it shows that coding isn’t just about computers—it’s also about creativity and learning how to think differently. I would definitely recommend Coding Kids to parents, grandparents, or teachers looking for a good introduction to coding. I came away from the book thinking that it could genuinely spark a child’s interest in technology and give them the confidence to explore something new."
While likely just another example of Hanlon's Razor ("Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity."), the recasting of an investigative nonfiction book that casts a critical eye at Amazon's influence on K-12 education as a learn-to-code primer for children doesn't exactly instill trust in the Amazon Vine program or Amazon's 'Top Reviews' selection process. More on-point book reviews of Coding Kids can be found at the Washington Independent Review of Books ("Turns out, Silicon Valley isn’t especially altruistic.") and Science ("Big Tech’s crusade to get kids coding is more self-interested than it first appears").
Comment Re:I'm kind of disappointed in the article (Score 1) 2
Can't do a book full justice in a brief Slashdot post, but she actually does go back and cover how Apple entered schools in the 80s in a chapter entitled 'From Tom Edison to Sam Altman.' She goes back even further into the history of tech and schools, including how Thomas Edison promised that movies would revolutionize education and replace textbooks - "They'll do all the teaching by moving pictures, all of it" he told the NY Times in 1912 - not unlike the current promises being made about AI.
Submission + - Journalist Calls Out 'Collective Amnesia' of Schools' Romance with Big Tech 2
theodp writes: The74 reports that in her new book, Coding Kids: Big Tech's Battle to Remake Public Schools ("the inside story of how Big Tech catalyzed, co-opted, and ultimately came to capture computer science and AI education in America"), Natasha Singer, a veteran business reporter for The New York Times, traces Big Tech's bid to persuade schools to embrace their products, with industry-sponsored curricula and tools growing at astonishing speed.
In his book review of Coding Kids , Aran Shetterly begins with a Spoiler Alert: "Turns out, Silicon Valley isn’t especially altruistic." He writes, "At the center of her book is the story of the nonprofit Code.org and its charismatic, Harvard-educated leader, Hadi Partovi. Thirteen years ago, Partovi produced a five-minute video called “What Most Schools Don’t Teach.” This 'audacious act of Silicon Valley influencer marketing...aimed...at a low-resourced nonprofit sector: public schools serving millions of children,' delivered a worrying message: Kids who didn’t learn to write code would be left behind. And the long-term success of the United States economy depended on training these students to fill a million open tech jobs. [...] No word in Coding Kids chills more than 'democratize.' 'Democratizing' sounds a lot like 'democracy,' but the tech-elite byword has nothing to do with a form of government; from the lips of the tech barons, it means enforcing ubiquitous access to their products."
Fast-forward to 2026, and now we're dealing with AI, and tech is reading from a similar playbook. Asked by The74's Greg Toppo, "Does this moment seem different to you?", Singer replies, "This moment is different, but also similar. We are in a moment in society where a lot of people have increased distrust of these huge tech companies, and we see a wave of parents pushing back against tech in schools. [...] We have had these cycles of tech in schools where there are all these promises about the latest tech, laptops, learning apps, massive open online courses, virtual reality, big data's going to revolutionize schools and like democratize access to education for kids and get them these great career skills, and we keep having these cycles. My concern is that we don't learn anything. One of the reasons I wrote this book is because it feels like we have collective amnesia. Now we're in the sixth or eighth cycle of this — and shouldn't we be asking questions about the push for AI in schools, based on what we've learned about the push for all the other things that came before?"
In his book review of Coding Kids , Aran Shetterly begins with a Spoiler Alert: "Turns out, Silicon Valley isn’t especially altruistic." He writes, "At the center of her book is the story of the nonprofit Code.org and its charismatic, Harvard-educated leader, Hadi Partovi. Thirteen years ago, Partovi produced a five-minute video called “What Most Schools Don’t Teach.” This 'audacious act of Silicon Valley influencer marketing...aimed...at a low-resourced nonprofit sector: public schools serving millions of children,' delivered a worrying message: Kids who didn’t learn to write code would be left behind. And the long-term success of the United States economy depended on training these students to fill a million open tech jobs. [...] No word in Coding Kids chills more than 'democratize.' 'Democratizing' sounds a lot like 'democracy,' but the tech-elite byword has nothing to do with a form of government; from the lips of the tech barons, it means enforcing ubiquitous access to their products."
Fast-forward to 2026, and now we're dealing with AI, and tech is reading from a similar playbook. Asked by The74's Greg Toppo, "Does this moment seem different to you?", Singer replies, "This moment is different, but also similar. We are in a moment in society where a lot of people have increased distrust of these huge tech companies, and we see a wave of parents pushing back against tech in schools. [...] We have had these cycles of tech in schools where there are all these promises about the latest tech, laptops, learning apps, massive open online courses, virtual reality, big data's going to revolutionize schools and like democratize access to education for kids and get them these great career skills, and we keep having these cycles. My concern is that we don't learn anything. One of the reasons I wrote this book is because it feels like we have collective amnesia. Now we're in the sixth or eighth cycle of this — and shouldn't we be asking questions about the push for AI in schools, based on what we've learned about the push for all the other things that came before?"
Submission + - Los Angeles Public School System Bans Most AI for Students
theodp writes: The Los Angeles public school system will vastly restrict the use of AI at all grade levels, reported the NY Times and others. The news of the ban — which oddly had to be coaxed out of LAUSD employees (YouTube) at a meeting of the LAUSD School Board Generative AI Ad Hoc Committee — stunningly came as a complete surprise to both the LAUSD Board and K-12 AI usage protestors (the employees were unable to answer a Board member's question about what LAUSD's policy was on schoolwork done using AI on students' personal devices). It comes shortly after New York City announced it would ban most AI through 8th grade. Both developments seem to respond to an extraordinary movement, driven by parents, to push back against the incursion of technology and screens into childhood. The new AI restrictions will apply for the current school year, as a board committee considers how to potentially incorporate the technology in the future.
For several years, the Times notes, debates over technology have roiled LAUSD, the nation’s second-largest, with over half a million students. Its former superintendent, Alberto Carvalho, was an AI booster who sought to develop the district’s own AI chatbot ("Ed") for students. But the small start-up company Carvalho selected to lead that project had little experience in generative AI, and its CEO was later indicted on charges that she had defrauded investors. Carvalho resigned from the district in June after the FBI searched his home and offices in a related investigation. Following his resignation, Carvalho was scrubbed from the Leadership page ("Visionaries driving our impact") of the tech-backed nonprofit CodeAI, where Carvalho was a Board member. CodeAI was known as Code.org until last June, when it rebranded itself as CodeAI in a pivot to AI literacy that was publicly encouraged by the leaders of its deep-pocketed tech giant corporate donors, including Microsoft President Brad Smith and Google CEO Sundar Pichai, who pledged to help fund the move.
This week's AI moratorium announcement by LAUSD would seem to be a setback for Microsoft, who a year ago used LAUSD as its AI Poster Child as it boasted it was bringing AI literacy and skilling to students and educators across the US, including using its partnerships with Code.org and Code.org's TeachAI initiative to provide AI literacy and skilling for all of LAUD's 409,000 students. LAUSD was a big booster of Code.org's inaugural Hour of AI last December, which received funding from Microsoft and replaced the nonprofit's flagship Hour of Code event as the nonprofit pivoted to AI. It also seems a setback for CodeAI, as the LA and NYC AI moratoriums cast doubt over whether the nonprofit's new AI curriculum and flagship Hour of AI event will be welcome in the nation's two biggest school districts for at least the 2026-27 year (coincidentally, the NBA announced this week that CodeAI $10+ million donor Steve Ballmer is facing his own 2026-27 suspension!). Code.org and its tech partners rapidly gained traction for pushing coding into classrooms with its first Hour of Code in 2013, which was bolstered by high-profile announcements of Code.org partnerships with some of the nation's largest school districts, including New York City and Chicago. So, will the AI backlash slow their efforts to do the same with AI?
For several years, the Times notes, debates over technology have roiled LAUSD, the nation’s second-largest, with over half a million students. Its former superintendent, Alberto Carvalho, was an AI booster who sought to develop the district’s own AI chatbot ("Ed") for students. But the small start-up company Carvalho selected to lead that project had little experience in generative AI, and its CEO was later indicted on charges that she had defrauded investors. Carvalho resigned from the district in June after the FBI searched his home and offices in a related investigation. Following his resignation, Carvalho was scrubbed from the Leadership page ("Visionaries driving our impact") of the tech-backed nonprofit CodeAI, where Carvalho was a Board member. CodeAI was known as Code.org until last June, when it rebranded itself as CodeAI in a pivot to AI literacy that was publicly encouraged by the leaders of its deep-pocketed tech giant corporate donors, including Microsoft President Brad Smith and Google CEO Sundar Pichai, who pledged to help fund the move.
This week's AI moratorium announcement by LAUSD would seem to be a setback for Microsoft, who a year ago used LAUSD as its AI Poster Child as it boasted it was bringing AI literacy and skilling to students and educators across the US, including using its partnerships with Code.org and Code.org's TeachAI initiative to provide AI literacy and skilling for all of LAUD's 409,000 students. LAUSD was a big booster of Code.org's inaugural Hour of AI last December, which received funding from Microsoft and replaced the nonprofit's flagship Hour of Code event as the nonprofit pivoted to AI. It also seems a setback for CodeAI, as the LA and NYC AI moratoriums cast doubt over whether the nonprofit's new AI curriculum and flagship Hour of AI event will be welcome in the nation's two biggest school districts for at least the 2026-27 year (coincidentally, the NBA announced this week that CodeAI $10+ million donor Steve Ballmer is facing his own 2026-27 suspension!). Code.org and its tech partners rapidly gained traction for pushing coding into classrooms with its first Hour of Code in 2013, which was bolstered by high-profile announcements of Code.org partnerships with some of the nation's largest school districts, including New York City and Chicago. So, will the AI backlash slow their efforts to do the same with AI?
Submission + - NBA Suspends Steve Ballmer for 1 Year, Fines Clippers $30M for Salary-Cap Scheme
theodp writes: GeekWire reports, "The NBA dropped the hammer on Los Angeles Clippers owner Steve Ballmer on Wednesday, suspending the former Microsoft CEO from all league and team activities for one year and fining the franchise $30 million following a year-long investigation into illegal salary-cap circumvention involving star forward Kawhi Leonard. The sweeping sanctions mark one of the most severe punitive actions taken against an owner in modern sports history. Beyond Ballmer’s ban and the team fine, the Clippers were stripped of five consecutive first-round draft picks (2029 through 2033), several team executives were suspended, and Leonard was ordered to pay $700,000 in restitution. Leonard’s uncle and advisor, Dennis Robertson, was also banned from league activity for five years."
"Central to what the NBA identified as a salary-cap evasion scheme was Aspiration, a green-banking tech startup that filed for bankruptcy after its co-founder pleaded guilty to a $248 million fraud. Shortly after signing Leonard to a $176 million contract extension in 2021, Ballmer personally poured $50 million into Aspiration, while the team landed a $300 million sponsorship deal and Leonard secured a multimillion-dollar endorsement contract with the firm."
Given today's events, looking prescient in retrospect is a 2014 Deadspin item that quipped, Steve Ballmer Practiced Being Owner With His Son's High School Team, which took note of a Seattle Times investigation into "incoming Clippers owner Steve Ballmer's foray into the shady world of high school prep sports and the wealthy parents living vicariously through their kids." Summarizing Ballmer's aggressive find-a-way-to-win maneuvers, Deadspin wrote, "Ballmer's son's basketball team at Lakeside School in Seattle [which Bill Gates once attended] sucked, and he wanted to make it un-suck. So he created a non-profit as a way to pump money and talent into the school, got friendly faces coaching positions, and pushed for an administration-wide commitment to athletics at the expense of academics. He was basically the owner of Lakeside basketball."
"Central to what the NBA identified as a salary-cap evasion scheme was Aspiration, a green-banking tech startup that filed for bankruptcy after its co-founder pleaded guilty to a $248 million fraud. Shortly after signing Leonard to a $176 million contract extension in 2021, Ballmer personally poured $50 million into Aspiration, while the team landed a $300 million sponsorship deal and Leonard secured a multimillion-dollar endorsement contract with the firm."
Given today's events, looking prescient in retrospect is a 2014 Deadspin item that quipped, Steve Ballmer Practiced Being Owner With His Son's High School Team, which took note of a Seattle Times investigation into "incoming Clippers owner Steve Ballmer's foray into the shady world of high school prep sports and the wealthy parents living vicariously through their kids." Summarizing Ballmer's aggressive find-a-way-to-win maneuvers, Deadspin wrote, "Ballmer's son's basketball team at Lakeside School in Seattle [which Bill Gates once attended] sucked, and he wanted to make it un-suck. So he created a non-profit as a way to pump money and talent into the school, got friendly faces coaching positions, and pushed for an administration-wide commitment to athletics at the expense of academics. He was basically the owner of Lakeside basketball."
Submission + - AI Banned in NYC Elementary and Middle Schools
theodp writes: The NY Times and others are reporting on a moratorium on student-facing generative AI use in schools, alongside a new screen time policy, a decision that will impact nearly 600,000 public school students, or two-thirds of the system's total enrollment. An announcement from the NYC Mayor's Office — Mayor Mamdani and Chancellor Samuels Put Students First with Nation’s Broadest Generative AI Moratorium in Schools — characterizes the policy as the most expansive student-facing AI moratorium in the nation
The new policy eliminates AI use for students in grades 2-K through 8th grade. This includes all software that uses student-facing generative AI. Companion chatbots will be prohibited across all grades. At the high school level, no more than 50,000 students in five limited pilots will be introduced to AI in general education courses. All high school students will also have access to twice-yearly AI literacy classes (two 45-minute modules) designed to help them think critically about AI before they begin to rely on it. Students in 2nd grade and below will see restricted 1:1 screen time, with recommended caps of 30 minutes a day for students in 3rd grade through 5th grade and 45 minutes for students in 6th grade through 8th grade.
“Children need teachers and human connection in order to learn and grow. They need to develop skills alongside their peers, build relationships with educators and wrestle with tough problems on their own,” said Mayor Mamdani. “The tech industry wants us to believe that A.I.-powered early education is not only inevitable, but necessary. We do not see it that way. That’s why we’re implementing a moratorium on generative AI for students in 2-K through 8th grade and spending the next year studying the impacts of this technology.”
The new policy eliminates AI use for students in grades 2-K through 8th grade. This includes all software that uses student-facing generative AI. Companion chatbots will be prohibited across all grades. At the high school level, no more than 50,000 students in five limited pilots will be introduced to AI in general education courses. All high school students will also have access to twice-yearly AI literacy classes (two 45-minute modules) designed to help them think critically about AI before they begin to rely on it. Students in 2nd grade and below will see restricted 1:1 screen time, with recommended caps of 30 minutes a day for students in 3rd grade through 5th grade and 45 minutes for students in 6th grade through 8th grade.
“Children need teachers and human connection in order to learn and grow. They need to develop skills alongside their peers, build relationships with educators and wrestle with tough problems on their own,” said Mayor Mamdani. “The tech industry wants us to believe that A.I.-powered early education is not only inevitable, but necessary. We do not see it that way. That’s why we’re implementing a moratorium on generative AI for students in 2-K through 8th grade and spending the next year studying the impacts of this technology.”
Submission + - Amazon HR Chief Boasts of Creating 100K LOC With AI, Says 'Everyone Can Code'
theodp writes: "I'm an Amazon SVP who hadn't coded in 25 years," reads the headline. "Then I wrote 100,000 lines of code with AI." In an Amazon News post, Amazon HR leader Beth Galetti on Tuesday offered her own personal experience with Amazon AI development tools as evidence that 'everyone can build' now.
So, what compelling problems prompted Galetti to come out of coding retirement to develop solutions for using AI after a quarter century? "My first project was a family calendaring app so we could all stay coordinated," Galetti explains. "That confidence carried me forward. On a flight back to Seattle, I opened Kiro, our AI-powered development tool, and started building. By the time I landed, I had built the submission app for what would become our internal team competition 'Everyone Can Build.' The challenge was to build an app or tool that solves a real problem in your work or everyday life using AI. No technical background required."
Galetti continued, "A few years ago, if a non-technical employee wanted to build something at Amazon, they needed a tech team and a spot on a roadmap. That's changed. As non-technical employees build more internally, our tech teams are freed up to move even faster, think bigger, and deliver even more for our customers. [...] This is one of the most exciting times in my career. When you give people the tools to build, they will surprise you with what they create. I can’t wait to see what we all build next."
Last January, Galetti also took to Amazon News to announce the elimination of 16,000 corporate jobs that coincided with the company's push to invest heavily in AI. "I'm grateful for how our teams continue to deliver," Galetti said in her layoff announcement post, "for customers, for each other, and for the incredible things we're building together."
So, what compelling problems prompted Galetti to come out of coding retirement to develop solutions for using AI after a quarter century? "My first project was a family calendaring app so we could all stay coordinated," Galetti explains. "That confidence carried me forward. On a flight back to Seattle, I opened Kiro, our AI-powered development tool, and started building. By the time I landed, I had built the submission app for what would become our internal team competition 'Everyone Can Build.' The challenge was to build an app or tool that solves a real problem in your work or everyday life using AI. No technical background required."
Galetti continued, "A few years ago, if a non-technical employee wanted to build something at Amazon, they needed a tech team and a spot on a roadmap. That's changed. As non-technical employees build more internally, our tech teams are freed up to move even faster, think bigger, and deliver even more for our customers. [...] This is one of the most exciting times in my career. When you give people the tools to build, they will surprise you with what they create. I can’t wait to see what we all build next."
Last January, Galetti also took to Amazon News to announce the elimination of 16,000 corporate jobs that coincided with the company's push to invest heavily in AI. "I'm grateful for how our teams continue to deliver," Galetti said in her layoff announcement post, "for customers, for each other, and for the incredible things we're building together."
Submission + - How Big Tech Captured American Schools
theodp writes: In How Big Tech Captured American Schools (alt source), an adapted excerpt of the forthcoming book Coding Kids: Big Tech’s Battle to Remake Public Schools, the New York Times' Natasha Singer begins: "Many parents would likely object if, say, Exxon Mobil wrote their children’s environmental science curriculum. Or if Purdue Pharma trained their children’s biology teachers. Yet, over the last decade, schools have often embraced the technology industry in similar ways with few questions asked. Industry-sponsored teacher training is just one technique that Big Tech companies use to shape schools and promote their worldviews to students. In interviewing more than 100 education and tech industry figures for my book, and reviewing hundreds of school, government and corporate documents, it became clear that a handful of giants have used their money, their might and their mammoth platforms to influence nearly every step of the education supply chain."
"Consumer tech giants provide the essential scaffolding that schools run on. That means laptops and tablets; operating systems and device-tracking software; the apps students use to write essays and analyze data; the messaging platforms that connect students and teachers; and more. Some of these companies, including Google, Microsoft and Apple, have also used their status as classroom tech providers as a springboard to influence how and what schoolchildren learn."
"This story matters whether you want schools to center tech skills or are agnostic, because the recent learn-to-code craze and the growing push for A.I. in schools are not just about learning. Those trends are part of a larger exercise of Silicon Valley power. The public education system, hungry for resources to improve opportunities for students, has become an avenue for multitrillion-dollar companies to enact their agendas."
"This development taps into fundamental questions about education that Americans have been arguing over for more than a century. What is the purpose of public schooling? Is it to raise critical, independent thinkers? Train students in the latest career skills? Help young people discover their passions? Serve the needs of the prevailing industry or emerging ones? Create knowledgeable and active participants in a democracy? Or all of the above?"
In an accompanying LinkedIn post, Singer adds: "Every few years, Silicon Valley has urged American public schools to quickly adopt the latest technology or teach the latest tech subject: Big Data analytics; laptops for every child; algorithm-driven math and reading apps; computer programming; virtual reality. And each time the urgent arguments sounded remarkably similar: if schools just adopted the latest tech tool, or taught the latest tech subject, it would democratize learning for every child and equip students with valuable career skills. The campaign to expand student access to computer science and other efforts had good intentions. But today we know some of those classroom tech drives did not exactly pan out as advertised. Now some of the same companies that urged schools to provide laptops and coding lessons are employing similar arguments to urge schools to quickly adopt A.I. tools. I've spent years covering Chromebooks and student chatbot use. And I'm troubled by our collective amnesia around school tech."
"Consumer tech giants provide the essential scaffolding that schools run on. That means laptops and tablets; operating systems and device-tracking software; the apps students use to write essays and analyze data; the messaging platforms that connect students and teachers; and more. Some of these companies, including Google, Microsoft and Apple, have also used their status as classroom tech providers as a springboard to influence how and what schoolchildren learn."
"This story matters whether you want schools to center tech skills or are agnostic, because the recent learn-to-code craze and the growing push for A.I. in schools are not just about learning. Those trends are part of a larger exercise of Silicon Valley power. The public education system, hungry for resources to improve opportunities for students, has become an avenue for multitrillion-dollar companies to enact their agendas."
"This development taps into fundamental questions about education that Americans have been arguing over for more than a century. What is the purpose of public schooling? Is it to raise critical, independent thinkers? Train students in the latest career skills? Help young people discover their passions? Serve the needs of the prevailing industry or emerging ones? Create knowledgeable and active participants in a democracy? Or all of the above?"
In an accompanying LinkedIn post, Singer adds: "Every few years, Silicon Valley has urged American public schools to quickly adopt the latest technology or teach the latest tech subject: Big Data analytics; laptops for every child; algorithm-driven math and reading apps; computer programming; virtual reality. And each time the urgent arguments sounded remarkably similar: if schools just adopted the latest tech tool, or taught the latest tech subject, it would democratize learning for every child and equip students with valuable career skills. The campaign to expand student access to computer science and other efforts had good intentions. But today we know some of those classroom tech drives did not exactly pan out as advertised. Now some of the same companies that urged schools to provide laptops and coding lessons are employing similar arguments to urge schools to quickly adopt A.I. tools. I've spent years covering Chromebooks and student chatbot use. And I'm troubled by our collective amnesia around school tech."
Submission + - OpenAI and Google Move Into K-12 Classrooms with New Kid-Friendly AI Offerings
theodp writes: "OpenAI announced on Tuesday 'ChatGPT for Teens'", the NY Times reports, "a new mode in which the chatbot automatically limits some conversations to better protect young users, as scrutiny grows over the harmful effects of artificial intelligence." OpenAI added that it's also teaming with tech-backed nonprofit CodeAI to 'prepare the first AI generation', announcing a 'signature partnership' that it says will "give students and educators access to tools and resources that will help them learn how to use and benefit from AI [...] helping teens understand how AI works, direct it, question it, and create with it—with teachers playing a meaningful role in shaping how AI enters the classroom." Separately, CodeAI said it and OpenAI will be "helping students build foundational AI literacy" via the Hour of AI, through which it said "OpenAI and CodeAI will introduce millions of students to the basics of using AI thoughtfully and responsibly."
OpenAI's ChatGPT for Teens announcement came just days after the NY Times reported that Google turned on Gemini AI for K-12 students using its Google Classroom, a learning management system for posting assignments and turning in schoolwork that's used by 150+ million students and teachers worldwide. A new Gemini tab within Classroom will allow students of all ages to seek AI help on math problems and writing assignments. They can also generate course aids like study guides, quizzes and flashcards, as well as produce images. Last September, Google CEO Sundar Pichai briefed the White House on the tech giant's efforts to get Gemini for Education in 'every high school in America', which he noted "includes $3 million to Code.org [since rebranded as CodeAI] to transform its [K-12] curriculum and integrate new AI features." And in December, Google.org kicked off the inaugural 'Hour of AI' by announcing "over $5 million in new Google.org funding to bolster computer science teaching in the age of AI." The 5-day event during CS Education Week saw 13+ million schoolkids take AI tutorials, including Google's AI Quests offering.
The moves by Google and OpenAI in advance of children's return to classrooms for the 2026-27 school year further escalate the race among U.S. tech giants to train students on their AI tools. They also come just ahead of next month's release of NYT journalist Natasha Singer's Coding Kids: Big Tech's Battle to Remake Public Schools, "the inside story of how Big Tech catalyzed, co-opted, and ultimately came to capture computer science and AI education in America."
OpenAI's ChatGPT for Teens announcement came just days after the NY Times reported that Google turned on Gemini AI for K-12 students using its Google Classroom, a learning management system for posting assignments and turning in schoolwork that's used by 150+ million students and teachers worldwide. A new Gemini tab within Classroom will allow students of all ages to seek AI help on math problems and writing assignments. They can also generate course aids like study guides, quizzes and flashcards, as well as produce images. Last September, Google CEO Sundar Pichai briefed the White House on the tech giant's efforts to get Gemini for Education in 'every high school in America', which he noted "includes $3 million to Code.org [since rebranded as CodeAI] to transform its [K-12] curriculum and integrate new AI features." And in December, Google.org kicked off the inaugural 'Hour of AI' by announcing "over $5 million in new Google.org funding to bolster computer science teaching in the age of AI." The 5-day event during CS Education Week saw 13+ million schoolkids take AI tutorials, including Google's AI Quests offering.
The moves by Google and OpenAI in advance of children's return to classrooms for the 2026-27 school year further escalate the race among U.S. tech giants to train students on their AI tools. They also come just ahead of next month's release of NYT journalist Natasha Singer's Coding Kids: Big Tech's Battle to Remake Public Schools, "the inside story of how Big Tech catalyzed, co-opted, and ultimately came to capture computer science and AI education in America."
Submission + - It's On: OpenAI ChatGPT for Teens and Google Gemini Vie for K-12 Schoolchildren
theodp writes: "We’re introducing ChatGPT for Teens, announced OpenAI on Tuesday, "an experience designed to help teens learn, think critically, deepen understanding, and use AI with confidence. It provides stronger built-in safety protections for teens, including features to promote healthy use and additional controls for parents." The partnership, OpenAI explains, "also builds on our ChatGPT for Teachers work to empower teachers and districts to guide AI use and our ongoing work with the American Federation of Teachers to build AI skills.
OpenAI added that it's also "partnering with [tech-backed nonprofit] CodeAI to prepare the first AI generation", announcing a 'signature partnership' to give students and educators access to tools and resources that will help them learn how to use and benefit from AI [...] helping teens understand how AI works, direct it, question it, and create with it—with teachers playing a meaningful role in shaping how AI enters the classroom." Separately, CodeAI provided a few details on how they'll work with OpenAI, including "helping students build foundational AI literacy" via the Hour of AI, through which it said "OpenAI and CodeAI will introduce millions of students to the basics of using AI thoughtfully and responsibly." With funding and encouragement from Microsoft, which is partnering with OpenAI on the $22.5 million AFT AI skill building and has a stake in OpenAI valued as high as $228 billion, CodeAI — formerly known as Code.org before rebranding in June — replaced its signature 'Hour of Code' event last December with the new 'Hour of AI' in a pivot from coding to AI literacy.
Interestingly, OpenAI's K-12 AI announcement comes less than a week after Google turned on Gemini AI for K-12 students using its Google Classroom, a learning management system for posting assignments and turning in schoolwork that's used by 150+ million students and teachers worldwide. At last September's White House AI Education Taskforce meeting, Google CEO Sundar Pichai briefed First Lady Melania Trump on the tech giant's efforts to get Gemini for Education in 'every high school in America', which he noted "includes $3 million to Code.org [now CodeAI] to transform its [K-12] curriculum and integrate new AI features." And in December, VP and Global Head of Google.org Maggie Johnson — who joined Code.org's Board together with Microsoft President Brad Smith back in 2013 as founding members — kicked off the 'Hour of AI' by announcing "over $5 million in new Google.org funding to bolster computer science teaching in the age of AI."
So, who do you think will win the AI custody battle over the nation's K-12 schoolchildren and their teachers? Is Google vs. OpenAI/Microsoft shaping up to be 2026's Kramer vs. Kramer?
OpenAI added that it's also "partnering with [tech-backed nonprofit] CodeAI to prepare the first AI generation", announcing a 'signature partnership' to give students and educators access to tools and resources that will help them learn how to use and benefit from AI [...] helping teens understand how AI works, direct it, question it, and create with it—with teachers playing a meaningful role in shaping how AI enters the classroom." Separately, CodeAI provided a few details on how they'll work with OpenAI, including "helping students build foundational AI literacy" via the Hour of AI, through which it said "OpenAI and CodeAI will introduce millions of students to the basics of using AI thoughtfully and responsibly." With funding and encouragement from Microsoft, which is partnering with OpenAI on the $22.5 million AFT AI skill building and has a stake in OpenAI valued as high as $228 billion, CodeAI — formerly known as Code.org before rebranding in June — replaced its signature 'Hour of Code' event last December with the new 'Hour of AI' in a pivot from coding to AI literacy.
Interestingly, OpenAI's K-12 AI announcement comes less than a week after Google turned on Gemini AI for K-12 students using its Google Classroom, a learning management system for posting assignments and turning in schoolwork that's used by 150+ million students and teachers worldwide. At last September's White House AI Education Taskforce meeting, Google CEO Sundar Pichai briefed First Lady Melania Trump on the tech giant's efforts to get Gemini for Education in 'every high school in America', which he noted "includes $3 million to Code.org [now CodeAI] to transform its [K-12] curriculum and integrate new AI features." And in December, VP and Global Head of Google.org Maggie Johnson — who joined Code.org's Board together with Microsoft President Brad Smith back in 2013 as founding members — kicked off the 'Hour of AI' by announcing "over $5 million in new Google.org funding to bolster computer science teaching in the age of AI."
So, who do you think will win the AI custody battle over the nation's K-12 schoolchildren and their teachers? Is Google vs. OpenAI/Microsoft shaping up to be 2026's Kramer vs. Kramer?
Comment Privacy Agreement, What Privacy Agreement? (Score 1) 50
Anyone see Google's intended use of the collected data spelled out or even implied in the "Primary Purpose for Collection and Use of Data" or elsewhere in the Spirit Privacy Agreement? Asking for 1.2 billion Spirit passengers.
Comment Wasn't a similar prediction made for e-books? (Score 1) 102
Why Kindle Books are priced higher than their print counterparts. And going back further, I seem to recall predictions being made that CDs and cassette tapes would be so much cheaper than vinyl. Oops.
Submission + - Google Turns On Gemini AI for K-12 Students Using Its Classroom App
theodp writes: The NY Times reports: "Google turned on its Gemini chatbot this week for some elementary through high school students using its popular Classroom app for schools, escalating a race among U.S. tech giants to train students on their artificial intelligence tools. Google Classroom, a learning management system for posting assignments and turning in schoolwork, is used by more than 150 million students and teachers worldwide. Until this week, Google automatically enabled Gemini in Classroom only for students 18 or older. Now, a new Gemini tab within Classroom will allow students of all ages to seek A.I. help on math problems and writing assignments. They can also generate course aids like study guides, quizzes and flashcards, as well as produce images."
"Google’s drive to increase student access to its A.I. tools ramps up a longstanding battle among tech giants like Apple, Google and Microsoft to capture classrooms and secure students as long-term customers. Newcomers to the school tech market, like the A.I. start-ups Anthropic and OpenAI, have recently started programs for K-12 teachers. But so far OpenAI and Anthropic have not made their ChatGPT and Claude chatbots available for student use in U.S. public schools. The industry is pushing for classroom chatbots as parents’ groups in New York City, Los Angeles and elsewhere are pressing schools to temporarily halt rollouts of student A.I. products. These groups say A.I. chatbots can pose risks to children’s safety, privacy and critical thinking. Some warn that using chatbots to generate study aids like flashcards and text summaries may hinder students’ learning."
At last September's White House AI Education Taskforce meeting, Google CEO Sundar Pichai briefed First Lady Melania Trump on the tech giant's efforts to get Gemini for Education in 'every high school in America', which he noted "includes $3 million to [tech-backed nonprofit] code.org to transform its [K-12] curriculum and integrate new AI features." The NY Times article coincidentally appeared as Code.org, which the Chronicle of Philanthropy recently noted has since rebranded itself as CodeAI in a pivot that aligns itself well with its bet-the-bank-on-AI tech donors, was wrapping up "our first-ever AI Education Hackathon" (thanking co-founding sponsors Google, Microsoft, and Amazon on LinkedIn for making it possible), "bringing engineers and builders with a background in AI and education to Boston for ... two days of building in the open toward a shared goal: preparing every student for a world reshaped by AI."
"Google’s drive to increase student access to its A.I. tools ramps up a longstanding battle among tech giants like Apple, Google and Microsoft to capture classrooms and secure students as long-term customers. Newcomers to the school tech market, like the A.I. start-ups Anthropic and OpenAI, have recently started programs for K-12 teachers. But so far OpenAI and Anthropic have not made their ChatGPT and Claude chatbots available for student use in U.S. public schools. The industry is pushing for classroom chatbots as parents’ groups in New York City, Los Angeles and elsewhere are pressing schools to temporarily halt rollouts of student A.I. products. These groups say A.I. chatbots can pose risks to children’s safety, privacy and critical thinking. Some warn that using chatbots to generate study aids like flashcards and text summaries may hinder students’ learning."
At last September's White House AI Education Taskforce meeting, Google CEO Sundar Pichai briefed First Lady Melania Trump on the tech giant's efforts to get Gemini for Education in 'every high school in America', which he noted "includes $3 million to [tech-backed nonprofit] code.org to transform its [K-12] curriculum and integrate new AI features." The NY Times article coincidentally appeared as Code.org, which the Chronicle of Philanthropy recently noted has since rebranded itself as CodeAI in a pivot that aligns itself well with its bet-the-bank-on-AI tech donors, was wrapping up "our first-ever AI Education Hackathon" (thanking co-founding sponsors Google, Microsoft, and Amazon on LinkedIn for making it possible), "bringing engineers and builders with a background in AI and education to Boston for
Comment Re:If the platform and apps are there... very litt (Score 1) 66
Do you use a single standard keyboard for the platforms that frees you from worrying about some of the different choices of keys and key mappings by the vendors? Or are you just really adept at context switching between the different muscle memory and OS/UI/app conventions for each of the platforms? I find using a Windows Citrix session from a MacBook using the same keyboard can be pretty taxing with all the different meanings depending on context!
