«AI is an aid, not a panacea»
Mr Wampfler, you were one of the first teachers in this country to use digital media in the classroom over ten years ago. What prompted you to do this?
New media was increasingly becoming a topic of conversation in schools at the time. However, on a more theoretical level, which, it seemed to me, didn't have much to do with what young people were interested in. Their approach to the topic is more direct and communicative. I realised, for example, that I reach female students better when I communicate in a group chat rather than by email. And over the years, I had observed how the use of new media was changing the use of language, the way young people write, read and perceive communication.
Youth language has always been a kind of laboratory for the future, and digital media have brought a lot of dynamism into it. For me as a German teacher, this opens up opportunities to talk to pupils about how language works and how it has changed. Tying in with teaching topics in this way suits her experimental nature.
Your literature lessons do the same: students write blog posts on their mobile phones, for example about Goethe's «Werther» - and you tolerate emojis, flippant writing or Anglicisms such as «sugar daddy».
Such formats are one of many ways of engaging with literature. Today, a classic like «The Sorrows of Young Werther» may seem like it was written by an old man. At the time, however, it was a provocative work aimed at a young audience and expressed modern influences that the elderly did not favour.
It's exciting to show schoolgirls: This used to be youth culture. What is written there, why do they talk like that? On the one hand, it's about creating learning environments in which young people can express themselves authentically. There is room for casual language. On the other hand, I want to show that there are other contexts that require correct language.
This seems to be a problem. Teachers at higher school levels, vocational trainers and university lecturers are complaining about learners' increasingly poor German skills. Digital media are suspected to be partly responsible for this.
Some young people lack the experience of being able to derive personal value from reading and writing. I think this has less to do with digital media than with a lack of opportunities to practise, for example in the family environment. But of course, with digital media came forms of expression and culture that adults find less desirable because we are not used to them. Some of the deficits we complain about are an expression of adultism: only the way we adults have always done it is the right way.
So your colleagues are too pessimistic?
I also see difficulties, especially with regard to the learning objectives. The wealth of skills that need to be acquired has increased rather than decreased. Curriculum 21, for example, touches on many topics, but there is not enough time to go into depth. More emphasis is placed on the general, and so the level of specific knowledge is falling.
Nevertheless, anyone who engages with young people realises that we are not dealing with a loss, but rather a shift of interests and skills to other areas. Good German skills are desirable and necessary in some professions, and I know that this is sometimes lacking. But there are also other professional fields, some of which are still unknown, where other skills are more important.
Media literacy, for example. What does the term mean?
I differentiate between two interpretations. Controlling media literacy in the traditional sense assumes that we must first acquire knowledge about media in order to be able to use them. In this context, media literacy means understanding the process of publication, for example knowing the players behind books and mass media - publishers, editorial offices and so on - but also being able to find your way around a library, distinguish between different types of text or compare information with that in reference works such as encyclopaedias. On the other hand, there is the principle of experimental media literacy. It relates to the modern information society and prioritises practice over knowledge acquisition.
Media literacy consists of assessing the impact of our actions online.
You have to explain that.
Content on the web is generated and managed by people and machines. We ourselves decide how this content is perceived: Depending on how we set our filters and settings, different content becomes more or less visible.
We are therefore no longer just recipients of information, but influence the way in which it is disseminated. Media literacy now consists of being able to assess the impact of our actions online, to be able to show or hide contexts and to use devices and programmes in a self-determined way. Now the learning process is reversed: we first gather experience and reflect on it in such a way that, over time, we develop skills.
However, according to a study by the University of St. Gallen, many young adults struggle when it comes to selecting or critically evaluating information from the Internet.
It would be naïve to assume that young people learnt such things casually. They use digital media with a different focus, it's about being well received by peers. Media skills require training, the integration of related issues into everyday life and constant repetition.
Dealing critically with information is like learning the rules of commas: You only learn through practice and have to deal with the topic repeatedly and in different contexts until you acquire expertise and routine. That is demanding.
How well do Swiss schools promote such skills?
My assessment would be like flying blind, because data for an international comparison is incomplete. And there is no standardised concept of what media literacy is. If we assume that this includes being able to distinguish facts from opinions or advertising, then I would assume that the majority of people, and not just young people, would struggle with this. Because a critical eye is not part of their routine when they use Instagram and the like, but it is also an increasingly difficult endeavour to separate the wheat from the chaff: The channels are the focus of an industry that doesn't do much other than subtly mislead people.
How much education can schools actually provide?
With regard to the question of what schools - in general - can achieve, there needs to be an honest discussion about what they can leave out in the future. New learning content is constantly being added without any noticeable redimensioning elsewhere. Both Curriculum 21 and the curriculum revisions at secondary school are evidence of this. This will not work in the long term.
We cannot avoid prioritising. Where are we prepared to say: we no longer need to learn this? We should prioritise the critical handling of information in particular. How do we categorise the information we receive and how do we evaluate it? We need to talk about this at school. This is also done, but there is not enough time for in-depth discussion.
How do you rate the media and IT module in Curriculum 21?
Digital media has thus been given a permanent place in the primary school curriculum. This is an achievement and should not be taken for granted, as the comparison with Germany shows. I also think the module is conceptually successful. It clearly differentiates between the areas of media, computer science and the application of computer science.
Curriculum 21 has done a lot of good in terms of media and IT.
When students used to learn how to create Excel spreadsheets, this was called computer science. But this is merely user knowledge. Computer science and media lessons were prone to misunderstandings. The new module provides guidance for schools and teachers. A lot has also happened in the training and further education of teachers and in terms of digital infrastructure. Curriculum 21 has done a lot of good here.
Where do you see room for improvement?
More commitment is needed to embed the topic in different contexts. Media psychology issues cannot simply be dealt with in two weekly media and IT lessons. They also need to be addressed in other subjects. In addition to the fact that there is a lack of time for this, it is also challenging for teachers to implement because not everyone has the same level of knowledge or access to the topic. But training and further education is underway and the situation will improve.
How do you teach students to critically scrutinise online content?
I take part in «Jugend debattiert» with all my classes. Teams negotiate a factual question and research social and political issues in advance. For example, I try to show how you can use information databases to find better quality content than simply googling.
Pupils collate material from different sources, then we take a look: Who says what? How are social issues linked to economic factors? Let's say it's about the costs of a cause. Are they high or low? A sum alone says little, but you can put it into perspective: What is the cost of the army, the Gotthard tunnel, Zurich Zoo? Such examples help to develop a frame of reference to which new information can be related.
Do you also talk about how social media influence opinion-forming?
Of course. In a school class made up of people from different backgrounds, it's easy to see how filter algorithms determine what individuals see - or don't see - online.
I only appeal to the students' common sense and self-discipline to a limited extent.
We also address current issues, such as why certain countries want to ban Tiktok. Young people's experiences also often trigger a discussion. About a video, for example: How is it that one video ends up in everyone's feed, while another is only shown to certain people? However, I don't tell students how they should use digital media, and I only appeal to their common sense and self-discipline to a limited extent.
Why?
They do what their peers do. If I come in as a teacher and say you have to be careful, it won't work. Youth media protection is a political task in many areas that we have to ensure through legislation, for example with stricter data protection guidelines, such as those currently being demanded for Tiktok. The app aggressively asks users for access to private data. Such consent means that it also gains access to the data of people who have not even installed Tiktok. Politicians must take action.
Some are also calling for this with regard to Chat GPT. The chatbot, which is based on artificial intelligence, answers questions and formulates texts at the touch of a button. What does this mean for schools?
For a long time, we could say that digitalisation is all well and good, but people are better at this and that. Chat GPT marks a turning point: we didn't expect this performance. Fundamental questions about what people will still be able to do in the future or will have to learn themselves are unavoidable. There will be a process of negotiation. It is difficult to predict how this will turn out.
Are you not afraid that housework will be outsourced to AI?
Yes, they did. However, when the pocket calculator first appeared, there were fears that schoolgirls would no longer be able to do maths properly because they could do their homework with the device. Today, we all use calculators and can still do maths. Chat GPT is a tool, why shouldn't we use it?
Because the programme - unlike a pocket calculator - can generate something new?
Perhaps students will be using Chat GPT in ten years' time for their school-leaving exams, because by then we will be prioritising skills so differently that they cannot simply be delegated to AI. This is all linked to the discussion about what skills a competent person in tomorrow's society needs to have.
I would also like to think with the class about where the limits of the tools lie.
How do you use AI in the classroom?
For example, for revising texts: pupils enter their text and the AI makes stylistic suggestions for improvement and points out spelling mistakes. This is a particularly helpful exercise for pupils who are not native German speakers. I also want to think with the class about where the limits of the tools lie. Once we have explored a topic in depth, we then ask Chat GPT, look at the answers and compare them with what we know. This allows us to develop a feel for the strengths and weaknesses of the chatbot and the problems that may be associated with it. I recently used AI as an introduction to poetry.
Tell us.
We had photos described by an AI. In the next step, we used another AI to turn this language input into a poem. We scrutinised the result: Are they really poems? How well do the texts fulfil the associated criteria? We realised that the bot can imitate certain lyrical processes very well, others not at all. I want students to realise that AI is a tool, not a panacea. They should use the tools, but consciously.
These are also helpful as input generators for finding topics. My students are allowed to work with them, but they have to declare it. We often talk about why this is important. Plagiarism scandals show: Mistakes only come to light much later. And it may well be that in a few years' time we will have software that can judge whether a text was written by a machine.
The cantonal school where you teach lets young people use their own digital devices in class. What effect does their constant availability have on learning?
There is certainly a risk of distraction. But it's no different later in your working life. It's a learning process. We have to try to provide good lessons, but we can't expect them to be more exciting than what's on the screen. There is a billion-dollar industry at work that I as a teacher can hardly compete with. Boredom is a problem that young people are increasingly complaining about. On the one hand, we have to see what we can do about it, but on the other, we have to demand certain things and make them clear: Now is the time for lessons. Many schoolgirls are good at making a distinction: They use their laptops for work and their mobile phones for private matters. Of course, there are always a few who sit at the back and game.
How do you deal with this?
In the past, there were also those who scribbled all over sheets of paper while the teacher spoke. Some students say that games like Candy Crush have a similar relaxing effect to drawing, that you can do them on the side without losing the thread. That can be true. However, I deliberately build in phases in which we work with paper, write by hand or work on something in a group and present it afterwards. The digital devices are left out. The aim is to keep the focus on the other person, the group or one thing. I want to show this: There are contexts that require undivided attention - and others where looking at a screen is okay.
