Episode 318: Paul Matthews & Jason Gulya

Artificial Intelligence, Real Literacy – Evidence-Based Practices in Action

 Join me on this engaging episode of My EdTech Life as I sit down with Paul Matthews and Jason Gulya to dive into their book titled Artificial Intelligence, Real Literacy: A Practical Guide to Using AI For Evidence-Based Literacy Practices in Education and explore how AI is transforming literacy instruction through evidence-based practices. We discuss everything from integrating AI in the classroom to verifying its output, and how teachers can harness technology without losing the human touch. Plus, hear personal stories, practical tips, and a rapid-fire round of fun questions!

Timestamps:
00:00: Welcome & Introduction
00:01: Meet Our Guests – Paul Matthews (Australia) & Jason Gulya (US)
00:03: Book Overview & The Need for Evidence-Based Practices
00:04: AI in Literacy – Strategies & Philosophies (Options, Not Answers)
00:10: Principles in Practice – Tailoring AI for Better Teaching
00:21: Doing the Basics Better – From Text Differentiation to Classroom Impact
00:32: Verifying AI Output – Organic Intelligence & Fact-Checking Tips
00:49: Rapid-Fire Round – Quick Advice and Fun Insights
00:56: Closing Remarks & Sponsor Shout-Outs

Sponsors & Call-to-Action:
A big thank you to our sponsors – Book Creator, Yellow Dig, and EduAide.AI for supporting our mission. Don’t forget to follow Paul and Jason on LinkedIn for more insights and join our community at My EdTech Life for additional high-quality content.

Stay Techie!

Authentic engagement, inclusion, and learning across the curriculum for ALL your students. Teachers love Book Creator.

Yellowdig is transforming higher education by building online communities that drive engagement and collaboration. My EdTech Life is proud to partner with Yellowdig to amplify its mission.

See how Yellowdig can revolutionize your campus—visit Yellowdig.co today!

Support the show

Episode Transcript

Fonz (00:30):
Hello everybody and welcome to another great episode
of my EdTech Life.
Thank you so much for joiningus on this wonderful day and,
wherever in the world thatyou're joining us from, as
always, thank you so much forall the likes, the shares, the
follows.
Thank you so much forinteracting with our content,
for all the wonderful feedbackand to all our new followers,
welcome.
Thank you so much for all ofyour support and I definitely

(00:53):
want to give a big shout out toour newest sponsor, book Creator
.
Thank you, book Creator, forthis awesome mug, and thank you
so much for believing in ourmission and bringing amazing
conversations here into oureducation landscape so we can
all continue to grow.
So thank you, thank you, thankyou, and today I am really
excited to welcome two amazinggentlemen.

(01:13):
These two gentlemen are peoplethat I follow on LinkedIn and
put out some amazing content.
If you have questions aboutintegrating AI and AI literacy
and literacy and AI and so manyother things involving literacy,
these two gentlemen willdefinitely have some answers for
you in all of their posts, oryou can even reach out to them

(01:34):
or pose a question to them ontheir LinkedIn comments, and I
promise you that they are sowonderful at answering those
questions.
So I would love to welcome tothe show all the way from
Australia on a Saturday morningMr Paul Matthews, and I would
love to welcome here from the USona Friday afternoon, mr Jason
Guglia.
So, paul, how are you doingthis morning there in Australia?

Paul Matthews (01:58):
I'm doing so well , fonz, I'm doing so well.
We were just chatting off air,but I've had a great week in the
classroom this week.
It's now 5.09 AM, which is mytime.
It's Saturday morning.
I absolutely love this time ofthe day.
I feel like my creative powersare exactly where they need to
be, so it's good to be with youboth.

Fonz (02:16):
Excellent.
And Jason, how are you doingthis afternoon here in the
States?

Jason Gulya (02:20):
I'm good.
It's so fun and interesting tobe on like different days.
If you told me that I would bedoing this like five years ago
and talking to people all overthe world, it would like blow my
mind and I wouldn't believe you.
So I feel like I'm in a verydifferent part of my day.
So me it's right after two andI just went through like three
or four hours of meetings.

(02:41):
So I just feel like I'm in avery it's not quite the end of
the day, but it's a point where,like, the work has sort of been
done and it's so, and I'm sureyou both know this or had this
experience in departmentmeetings AI always comes up and
so I'm not allowed to like justsit there and vegetate.
I always talk.
So that's where I am in my day,but I'm doing well.

(03:02):
I'm tired.

Fonz (03:04):
Excellent.
Well, thank you both for beinghere today, on this wonderful
day, and I'm really excited totalk about, and we're going to
be focusing mainly on, your book, you know.
So I'm really excited and thebook of course, we see it here
in the image where Paul is hasthe book there Artificial
intelligence real literacy apractical guide to using AI for
10 evidence-based literacypractices in education.

(03:27):
So, as we know, 2022 happenedand I don't want to go that far
back, but that kind of changed alot of education, a lot of
practices in education.
But today we're going to befocusing on that literacy aspect
and component of it, which isgreat because, like I mentioned,
you two are two people that Ilove to follow, especially when
it deals with this.
Great because, like I mentioned, you two are two people that I
love to follow, especially whenit deals with this topic.

(03:48):
So I'm going to go ahead andstart with you, jason, at this
moment.
We know that the book opens upwith a great anecdote, you know,
of using AI in the classroom toteach students about reading.
So I want to start with youhere, because it's very
interesting that the book titleis called Artificial
Intelligence Real Literacy.
So I want to start with youhere, because it's very

(04:09):
interesting that the book titleis called Artificial
Intelligence, real Literacy.
So I want to ask you you knowwhat is it that we need in
education right now and thepurpose of this book and how it
can help teachers.

Jason Gulya (04:18):
Yeah, so the real idea here in many ways is that
we have this mountain ofevidence, I think, that in my so
I teach college and I focus onreading and writing, and there's
a lot of hesitancy there.
If you wanted to move into aspace that is so divided in
terms of using AI, not using AI,it is English department.

(04:42):
So literally in my department Ihave myself and I've
incorporated into many parts ofmy curriculum we have several
faculty members who completelyban it and they would tell their
students if you use AI, I willfind you right, like there is
that sort of a language to it,and then many people in the
middle, and that is very muchrepresentative, I think, of

(05:03):
English departments, especiallyat the college level.
There's all of this division,all of this hesitancy, and one
of the things that I'mconstantly reminding people of
and this is many reasons is theidea behind the book, is that we
have this mountain of evidencefor what works, for what
actually works with teachingworks, for what actually works

(05:26):
with teaching, and one of thethings that I truly believe is
that AI has changed a lot ofthings about society, about the
way we interact, but it hasn'treally changed the principles of
good teaching, that, what makesteaching engaging, what helps
us learn how to read and writeand really focus on the value of
literacy.
Those are pretty constant.
We have all this evidence thatreally, really we should have
been sticking to a long time ago, and especially at my level, at

(05:48):
the college level, many of usdo not do that.
Many of us hadn't been stickingto those evidence-based
practices.
There was a lot of lecturing,there was a lot of one-sided
conversations.
A professor tells a studentwhat to do and they do it.
That sort of transactionalapproach, which we've known for

(06:13):
a really really long time,doesn't work, and so one of the
best uses of AI in my, in ouropinion, is actually sticking to
the evidence.
So if we have certainstrategies that help students
read and write, now we can stickto them in a way that's easier,
right or faster, actually savesus time, and we can stick to it
.
This is something that obviouslywe focus on it with literacy,
but I do think it's broadlyapplicable.
I do think that people canapproach it from other fields

(06:35):
and say well, this is what weknow about teaching and learning
and this is how I can use AI toaugment what I'm already doing,
because maybe I wasn't doingthings as much as I could have.
So one of the examples that Ioften give is making learning
accessible.
Many of us have been going forthe last 10 years to these

(06:57):
training and learning about howto create accessible materials
and everything.
A lot of us weren't doing it.
We just weren't, there wasn'ttime, and so now one of the ways
to use AI is to make sure thatwe are creating accessible and
everything.
A lot of us weren't doing it,we just weren't, there wasn't
time, and so now one of the waysto use AI is to make sure that
we are creating accessiblelearning or we are having these
activities that we know work andthat, in many ways, is the kind
of impetus behind the book, andthat's something that I think.

(07:18):
Obviously we focus on it withliteracy, but it applies to
other fields and it appliesregardless of what you teach
Excellent.

Fonz (07:26):
Well, paul, now on to you Very similar question that I'm
going to ask you.
But I want to ask you because,again, it's such a very
interesting title and I'm stillwith that.
But I love the way that Jasonhit on a couple of things there.
That, as far as still stickingto that evidence-based practice
and using the AI to augment andI was recently at a conference,

(07:48):
too, in Puerto Rico and theywere talking about the SAMR
model and then they're talkingabout that augmentation piece
and a lot of people just notreally ever getting there.
It's usually the substitutionaspect of it and it's really
like going from paper to aChromebook or a screen but never
really being able to take thatnext step and what that looks

(08:08):
like.
But now I want to ask you youknow, what does this
juxtaposition mean to youpersonally and how does it
reflect in your own practice andin your vision of education?

Paul Matthews (08:18):
That's a really good question, and it sort of
harkens back to one of my bigphilosophies that undergird my
AI practice, fonz, and it's thisI'm not a big tech guy.
Unlike yourself, I don't getthat excited about technology.
What I get really, reallyexcited about is my students
learning, my students growing,my students being formed in the
way that I want as an educator.

(08:40):
That's why I wake up early andstay up late, that's why I work
as hard as I can in this field,because I want my students to
grow.
And so then, when it comes toartificial intelligence, I'm
really excited about it, notbecause of what it is, not
because it's a specific kind oftechnology, but because of what
it can do, because of the impactit can have.
And the impact it can have in myclassroom is that it helps me

(09:01):
do more evidence-based practicesmore often for more learners,
and that's actually a visionthat a lot of educators can get
behind, because most educatorsout there they don't get really
excited about technology.
They haven't got the smartfridges, they haven't got those
vacuums that are robots andvacuum your house by themselves,

(09:22):
but what they do have is aburning passion to see their
students grow and learn andattain this sort of knowledge
that we want them to have.
In a lot of classrooms that'snot happening, and so that's my
in when I talk about artificialintelligence with educators.
Not that it's a technology thatyou can get excited about, but

(09:42):
it's an impact you can getexcited about, and that's the
philosophy that then would situnder our practice.
That's the purpose underneaththe practice.
Hey, let's use it to do thethings that we know will help
our learners, because that'sgoing to help us then have the
sort of lasting impact that weall show up to work to have.

Fonz (10:02):
That's excellent.
Thank you so much for sharingthat, and then.
So now my next question.
You know, and again, your bookwas well.
One of the things that I mustcompliment you on is how easy it
was to read and how practicalit is to be able to learn from
it.
So I want to ask you, though,about talking about the central
principles.
This is something that reallystuck out to me, using AI for

(10:23):
options and not answers, so Iwant to ask you and I'll start
with you, paul, but for both ofyou how did each of you arrive
at this philosophy, and couldyou share some examples of your
own teaching practices where youfound this particularly
valuable?

Paul Matthews (10:39):
Options, not answers, is one of the best
philosophies you can embedwithin your AI practice, because
what it does, fonz, is itrecognizes that the educator is
the expert.
The educator is the expert.
So we have knowledge about ourcurriculum, about our content,
about our learners, that the AIwill just never have, and so
when I go to AI, I don't ask itto do something for me.
For example really simpleexample I'm doing a multiple

(11:03):
choice quiz and that's forretrieval practice, to help my
learners think through somethingwe might have learned last
lesson If I need 10 questions, Idon't ask for 10.
Why not?
Because that would be asking forthe resource in its final form,
what I want to do, treatingmyself as the person who's the
expert in the room, not theartificial intelligence.
If I want 10 questions, I askfor 15 and I choose the best 10.

(11:26):
Now, that might seem like areally simple shift, and it is,
but it makes a world ofdifference.
It allows me actually toleverage my wisdom and
discretion and pastoralknowledge of my students and
understanding of what exactly wecovered in class.
It's a fantastic shift thatjust treats me as the expert and
allows me to create not just ageneric resource for a generic

(11:48):
class, but a tailored resourcefor my class.
So that would be my bigencouragement to any educator
they go.
Oh, I'm not quite sure what todo with artificial intelligence.
I keep producing this reallysort of generic beige output.
If you ask for twice as much asyou need and then use your
intellect, your expertise as ateacher, to choose the best

(12:09):
stuff, and then that's the stuffyou're giving to your class,
it's a great way to keep your AIwork human-centered and
actually just make sure thatyou're giving your learners the
best high-quality resources thatyou're able to.

Fonz (12:22):
Excellent.
Now, Paul, just to clarify realquick, before I go to Jason
with this question what greatlevels is it that you're
currently teaching?

Paul Matthews (12:30):
Good question.
So I teach year 9 and 10history and I also teach
psychology in year 11 and 12.
Excellent.

Fonz (12:37):
All right, and this is great because I want to give
some context to our listenerstoo.
As well.
As we know, jason works inhigher ed, and then that way, I
forgot to ask you where it isthat you you know your area of
expertise.
So thank you so much forsharing that.
Because one of the things,though, that I do want to
highlight and point out is whatI love that you said is that the
teacher is still in control andusing their own critical

(13:00):
thinking skills and using, ofcourse, their expertise in the
content.
My biggest fear and I've saidthis so many times since the
very beginning is just thatoftentimes, with the new tech
and that new excitement andwe're always pressed for time is
that that initial output isgoing to be gospel to teachers
and they're just going to goahead and send it out.

(13:22):
So I think that I really lovethat you mentioned that, if you
do ask for a little bit more is,as a teacher, we must do our
due diligence to make sure,obviously, that that output is
correct and based on that output, like you mentioned, using our
best judgment, knowing ourstudents, knowing our audience,
being able to take those outputsand, like I always say, kind of

(13:43):
add them as a little seasoningto what you as a teacher are
already doing great and maybeexpand and augment on those
lessons and that learning.
So I really love what you saidthere.
Now, jason, going on to you aswell, in the higher ed space,
using AI for options, notanswers.
I know that you post often on alot of the projects that you

(14:04):
work on, but tell me a littlebit about your experience with
that.

Jason Gulya (14:08):
It's so interesting because I had an experience
yesterday that I'm just going tobring in.
So yesterday I had theopportunity to talk to a group
of high school students.
So these are high schoolstudents who are looking at our
college and they they had me runa 45-minute session on AI and I
did it on the AI mindset andone of the things that really

(14:30):
threw those students for a loopis it's a 45-minute session.
We only did things with AI forabout 15 minutes and we talked a
lot about their approach tothis technology.
And Paul used the word, as hewas talking, shift.
And one of the things that I'llreally focus on is that there
are a couple of shifts that doreally need to happen to make

(14:53):
uses of this technology, and oneshift is a move from a kind of
transactional mindset.
Many of those high schoolstudents really saw most of them
not all of them had usedChat2BT or another AI program.
They'd use like Snapchatseveral of them or use Grammarly
, so they had some experiencewith it and they had this very
transactional approach that theysaw AI as producing something

(15:19):
for them, and very few of them.
This is one of the first bigshifts that really happened with
me and I think that is reallyreally helpful for thinking
about options, not answers isthat moving towards a more
conversational mindset, so thatwe're using AI a lot of times
not just for the output but whatit generates in us, right.

(15:42):
So for me, the idea of creatingoptions, not answers is
connected to thinking about AIis.
I'm a co thinker and one of thethings that I talk to my
students a lot about is thateveryone can have different
processes for doing this.
So one of the things that I dowhen I want to generate options,
not answers is when I use an AIprogram, I actually start small

(16:05):
and then I expand.
So I might say I'm thinkingabout something.
I often do this.
I'm like kicking back an idea,get back and forth an idea about
a game in class or an activityin class.
I might say I'm sort of stumped.
So I might go into an AIprogram and say just give me
three options, right.
I usually start small,sometimes I just do two, but

(16:26):
often three is a good number andI might say, out of those three
, one might be really good.
One is usually pretty awful ornot actually possible.
It's not so we could actuallydo it and then one sort of
mediocre, and then I can say,all right, I like number two,
give me 10 more like that.
And that's when you sort of youtake that example, you expand
it and then out of those 10, Imight say you know, number two

(16:49):
is good, number four is good,number eight is really good, all
right, so I want you togenerate now 10 more.
Use number eight as your model,and that allows me to just
redirect it more and more,because the other shift that I
think needs to happen isthinking about prompting.
A lot of my students when theycome into the classroom,

(17:11):
certainly if they're my collegeclass, and a lot of my students
when they come into theclassroom, certainly if they're
in my college class and a lot ofthose high school students had
this language too they are veryinterested in prompt engineering
, and one of the things thatthat term just does so
incorrectly is it gives studentsthe impression that what you
really need is a perfect promptyou can send in there Maybe it's
a couple of paragraphs, maybeit's a page, and then you get

(17:32):
that output.
And so I noticed this, like acouple of years ago no one was
leaning into those follow-upmessages, no one was really
doing it and the idea thatreally that's the most important
part never really occurred tomost of them, and I had to come
in and say, all right, that'syour first message, that's what
you got.
Now how do you go from there?

(17:52):
How do you redirect it?
How do you let it know?
This is what's working, this iswhat's not working, and that's
the option mindset.
That's when it's just aboutgive me options and then I can
come in and say you know, we'regoing to shift this, we're going
to make this change, or maybeand sometimes I do this we're
going to make this change.
Or maybe and sometimes I dothis too I might look at a list

(18:14):
of options from ChatDVT or anyprogram and I might just end the
chat and say I have ideas basedoff of that.
So it's not actually coming fromthe AI, but and this is where I
use it as a co thinkersomething that pops into my mind
because of the conversation andthis all comes back to a lot of

(18:34):
the real themes that I see inthis conversation, which is one
of the best things we can do islook at this technology, figure
it out, play with it and thenlook beyond it.
Try to look back, look atwhether it is helping our
students out or how it can helpour students out, looking at how
it's going to be used toimprove things with teaching and

(18:56):
learning.
And that's really what matters,because the tech is kind of
glitz and glamour and nice andcool and it's very fun and at
least for me to watch it justspout out answers, but in the
end we need to look past it,actually make use of it, and
that's the doubleness that Ithink is lost on a lot of people
.
I think it just takes a lot ofthought and practice to kind of

(19:18):
get to that point.
But that's where I think weneed to be and that's where you
start to really approach AI as aco thinker or as a generator of
options, not answers, andthat's such a different mindset
to me and, I think, a lot of mystudents and certainly this
group of high school students.
Those are big shifts.
That's something that we needto get beyond, because many of

(19:39):
my students come in with a verytransactional mindset when they
use this technology.

Fonz (19:44):
Very much so.
And going back again, it's thattransactional mindset that I
think has developed and myself,working in K through 12, but
also going, you know, throughhigher ed and master's and
doctoral programs, there weremany times where there was a
specific project or specificsomething that we needed to do
and then it was always like justtell me what to do so I can get

(20:06):
the A, and then that's all I'mgoing to do.
Hey, and then that's all I'mgoing to do, as opposed to one
year.
One of our professors kind ofthrew, you know just kind of
this surprise to us and said hey, here's a choice board, you've
got six options that you canchoose from, and in any of those
combinations I need 22 contacthours.
And I was like this is amazing.
I was like because coming inK-12, we do choice boards and I

(20:26):
did choice boards, but the lookon my you know colleagues faces
when they're just like I don'tget it, like I don't understand,
like just tell me how to getthe A and she's like you get to
choose from you know these five,six areas and they were just
what, like what's going on?
So it's that transactionalthinking that I do see a lot and

(20:47):
I think I really can relate towhere it is that you're coming
from.
But this kind of leads me to mynext question, paul, and I'll go
ahead and start with you,because one of the things that
you mentioned in the book and Iknow we've kind of hit on it a
little bit, but I want to go ina little bit deeper is the do
the basics better?
And I think with this questionright now.
Previously you kind of answereda little bit of that, but

(21:09):
rather than doing entirelysomething new, it's that
perspective.
How has this evolved in yourcurrent teaching and with your
experiences, but also some ofthe pushback, paul, tell me a
little bit about that.
Do the basics better?

Paul Matthews (21:27):
Well, that's one of the key philosophies in the
book Fonz, and it comes fromthis idea that artificial
intelligence meets us with noclear purpose, so it doesn't
come with a set of instructions,really, and so then we're left
to think about well, what shouldwe use it for?
The reason a lot of educatorsget frustrated about AI is

(21:49):
because it represents asignificant disruption.
And then there's, unfortunately, an idea that pops into a lot
of people's heads implicitly,and it's that if I'm going to
use new technology, I've got todo new things with it, and so a
teacher will stand back then andI've had this conversation a
hundred times Teacher will standback and go.

(22:10):
Well, for the last 20 yearsI've been collecting pedagogical
strategies and I've beencollecting lessons and I've been
collecting certain ways ofassessing.
That's a grab bag that makes mewho I am as a teacher.
That's part of my teacherpersonality, and they fear that
if they're going to use newtechnology, they're going to use

(22:31):
new technology, they're goingto have to do new things.
That bag it's so important thatthey've been collecting for
that's going to have to go inthe bin and that's a big fear,
and I can understand why no onewants to start again, especially
when we've worked so hard atcultivating a set of practices
and pedagogies that we think areeffective and work well.
So the underlying message inthe book is that we don't have

(22:52):
to use new technology to do newthings.
We can actually use it to dothe basics of education better,
and so a really simple exampleof that and it's one we show
people how to do in the book istext differentiation.
It is one of the most basicthings you can do.
In my grade nine class, thereare people who are reading at a
grade nine level, but there's asizable minority who are reading

(23:14):
at a grade seven level, and soif I hand that grade nine level
text out to every learner,that's what I like to call the
spray and pray right, I'mspraying it out there, I'm
praying, they can read it.
Often they can't, and theproblem with that is that then
they're disengaged.
All the thinking that comesfrom that reading, all the class
discussion, all the retrievalpractice that we'll do over the

(23:35):
next couple of weeks, well, it'slost on that learner, and so
there's a sort of a multitude ofbad effects that come from them
just not being able to accessthe reading One of the most
basic things we can do for alearner is then adjust the
length and complexity of areading down from year nine
level to year seven level.
The only thing was, althoughthat's pretty basic and

(23:57):
relatively simple, it's timeintensive.
It used to take me about halfan hour to adjust a 10 minute
reading and I might be doingwhat?
14 readings a week, 15.
I just don't have that kind oftime, sadly.
And that's the beauty ofartificial intelligence.
I can do what used to take mehalf an hour.
I can now do it in half aminute.
And it's not the sort of amazing, sparkling, brand new, cutting

(24:22):
edge pedagogy.
It's just a thing teachers havebeen doing forever, done more
effectively for more learners.
So that's our big vision.
We can use it to do the basicsof education better.
Now, of course, fonz, there aresome people out there who are
doing some of that brand new,cutting edge, metaverse, virtual
reality sort of stuff, and Godbless those guys.
That's absolutely fine.

(24:43):
I've got nothing against it.
But just when it comes to me andmy practice and the vision
Jason and I are trying to share,we're saying well, we can
actually use it, we canencourage teachers.
All the things that youcurrently do in your practice.
They're still relevant, they'restill valuable in a world that
has AI in it.
In fact, you can lean intothose things that you're already

(25:04):
an expert in and do them moreoften for more learners, and I
find that's a vision that's notonly compelling but also
disarming for teachers, and theygo actually, you know what All
the expertise I already have.
It's valuable, I can use it.
In fact, I can do more of it,and that actually moves teachers
along and helps them getexcited about the possibilities
of AI in their practice.

Fonz (25:26):
It's a great answer and that's something that I find
very interesting.
You hit on a lot of greatthings there, especially with
teachers just being.
You know, many times they maynot adapt as easily and they see
this as a threat.
But now the way that youexplain this is just about being
able to do that basic, whatthey would normally do or have

(25:47):
to do to help support theirstudents, but just doing it a
lot quicker or have to do tohelp support their students, but
just doing it a lot quicker.
I mean, one of the examplescould be and I've had this in my
experience where you'restarting a new unit, you're
already well into the middle ofthe unit and then you get a new
student that comes in, and in myarea sometimes the students
come in speaking Japanese orspeaking Korean and now it's
like, well, like I don't havethat material here, and

(26:09):
sometimes it takes long forthose people that specialize in
getting the materials for them.
It may take them a little bitlonger because there's more
students, but now, quickly andeffectively, like I can take a
reading, translate it tosomewhat, you know they can
understand follow along with thelesson and to be able to, you
know, keep them, you know, atpace with us, and then, of
course, make any adjustmentsneeded for those reading levels,

(26:31):
and I think that's fantastic.
Jason, what has been yourexperience?
I know that you post a lotabout this, too, as well, but
you know what have been some ofthe good and then, of course,
some of the pushback that youget.

Jason Gulya (26:44):
I am in a ton of meetings now where higher ed
professionals so some of themare faculty, some of them are
administrators and some havesome other role in the college
or university where it sort ofends in the same spot and it
ends with someone saying we haveto fundamentally change every
single thing that we do.
And when are you going to giveus the time to do that Right?

(27:08):
There's always that follow up.
When are you going to say Iknow you're already teaching
five classes, but nowfundamentally change everything
you do about assessment oranything you do about teaching?
And I often use that as anopportunity, if there's time,
for me to come in and do alittle bit of course correction
there, because I do think thatthere is this misunderstanding
about what disruption means.

(27:29):
I think there are certainthings that this technology will
really disrupt and force us toreally revisit.
But I don't think we shouldfall victim to the idea that
this means we just throweverything out the window,
because I completely agree withPaul that we have, regardless of
what you teach, regardless ofwhat level you're at, you have

(27:49):
all of these strategies andtechniques to engage students
and help them along.
We don't have to get rid ofthose.
So a lot of it is trying tofigure out things that maybe you
can scale now that you couldn'tscale five years ago.
So his example of textdifferentiation is a big one,
and in college level, a lot ofmy students are still struggling
with literacy.
So being able to personalizesomething for them and create a

(28:12):
plan from there is really reallyhelpful.
Or if it's something that youcan just do more frequently, so
in the classroom, role-playingI've done for years I think I've
done role-playing for 10 plusyears in my humanities courses
and now there are ways to scaleit up a little bit more, right,
you can use AI to allow for moreand more practice, and so

(28:32):
things like that that really,really help the student out.
And I think that there'sanother part of this
conversation which is and I'llkind of lean into the one of the
words that Paul used, and hewas talking purpose, having a
sense of purpose that thistechnology comes to us with no
sense of purpose, no realdirection, and that's how we

(28:57):
lean into our own sense ofpurpose.
A lot of what I do when I talkto faculty members about
assessment in particular, isasking them what the purpose of
something is, and this issomething that we should be
talking about for a long time,right?
So if you are teaching aliterature class or whatever it
is, and all of your assignmentsare just essays, you just have a
bunch of essays that we'redoing, right, really taking a

(29:18):
step back and saying, all right,what was the purpose of that?
Let's take that to the basics,let's break it down, what do you
want to get out of that?
And being very self-reflectiveabout it.
So for some of us, we might say, oh, I actually thought about
it and I'm not that interestedin giving an essay.
Maybe there's another way to doit, because at the college

(29:41):
level, we all give essays, everysingle class.
I don't care what you're doing.
A student will go and take anEnglish class, write a bunch of
essays.
They'll go into history, writea bunch of essays, go into math,
write a bunch of essays, gointo math, yes, and write essays
.
Go into chem and write essays,like built into it.
And so for some of us, we thinkabout was that actually the
best way to do that?
And then for others and this isjust where purpose comes in we

(30:04):
might say, yes, I want mystudents to write an essay, and
here is why, and that it's thatwhy that really really matters.
And I was talking to a group offaculty maybe about a week or so
ago and one of them said youknow, I really, and you know I
gave a particular reason.
I really want my students towrite essays because I want them

(30:24):
to see what structured thoughtlooks like, even if it's not
totally authentic.
I want them to get a sense ofwhat that looks like.
And so she said but because ofAI, I have to get rid of it, I
have to delete it.
And I came in and said no, youactually don't, you don't have
to do that, right, that's thatmay not be necessary.
And then we ended up talkingabout you know, maybe there's a

(30:45):
way to make just the processmore visible for students, like
what are ways that maybe it's amatter of process over product?
And then how can you thenreshape it if you want to
reshape it to focus on that, andso that allowed them to come in
and say, oh, maybe I don't haveto get rid of the essay,
because they really believe inthat and they have the evidence
to support using that in theirparticular context.

(31:06):
So sometimes it might make senseto move in another direction.
Sometimes it might make sense tomove in another direction.
Sometimes it might mean, oh, youjust go back to what you
actually wanted out of theassignment and you can keep the
essay and maybe there is achange you can make, or maybe
you don't make a change at all.
And being able to make thosedecisions is a huge part of who
we are, and one of the thingsthat I believe is that we need

(31:28):
to do, as educators, anythingthat doesn't make us feel like
machines, one of the definingthings about us.
We have these personalities, wehave these senses of purpose,
and so we need to actually leaninto that, because moving in
that direction it just makes usmechanical in a certain way.
Mechanical in a certain way,and that so much of it is based

(31:49):
off of educators being theexperts, knowing, knowing the
evidence, or hopefully knowingthe evidence and being able to
make those decisions.
So I think that in the end, itcomes down to just looking at
everything and making a nuanceddecisions, and it might not mean
doing something brand new.
Maybe it's making a change,maybe it's not making a change,
but being able to make thatdecision, I think, is key for

(32:11):
what we should be doing aseducators.

Fonz (32:13):
Excellent, and that kind of brings me to a nice segue and
talking about addressing someof those concerns and I know you
hit a little bit on that, jasontoo and Paul, you know,
throughout our conversation, youknow that kind of gets
sprinkled in, you know,especially during a topic like
this, you know, dealing with AI.
But I want to go and start withyou, paul, you know.
I know that you've talked aboutthis in the book too as well,

(32:34):
talking about auditing AI withorganic intelligence, and I
thought that that was fantasticthe way that that was titled,
and I know that's one of thesections there in the book.
So I want to ask you, each ofyou and we'll start with you,
paul, talking about organicintelligence how do you approach
this verification process inyour own work and what tips do

(32:55):
you offer educators who areconcerned about AI accuracy?

Paul Matthews (33:01):
Well, look, I think educators have every right
to be wary of the accuracy ofAI output.
We talk about it in the book,but there's three big ways that
artificial intelligence can justget things wrong, and some of
them are sneakier than others.
So the first one is just plainwrong, and we give an example in
the book of artificialintelligence.
There was ChatGPT saying thatthere was a bloke who walked

(33:23):
across the English channel andhe did it in eight hours and
it's the world record.
And, of course, no one'swalking across the English
channel.
So there's just going to bestuff out there that's plain
wrong and thankfully that'spretty easy to pick up,
especially for us, for ourstudents maybe not so much.
They're probably picking upthat no one's walking on water,
but some of those big, egregiouserrors, you still need your

(33:44):
content, knowledge and yourexpertise to be able to pick
them out.
So it can be really, reallywrong.
It can also be subtly wrong.
We talk about the James Webbtelescope.
I don't know if you rememberback when Google was launching
its AI.
Oh, let me know someinteresting facts about the
James Webb telescope that I cantalk to my son about.
And he said oh well, it was thefirst telescope to take a photo
of a planet in another galaxyor something similar, and of

(34:07):
course it did do that, but itwasn't the first.
And that wiped like a couple ofhundred million off the Google
share price.
But it was a very subtle errorand it took an astrophysicist on
Twitter to pick it up.
So it can be really wrong, itcan be a little bit wrong or it
can be what we call right butwrong, and the way that I've
seen it be right but wrong.
A friend of mine was telling astory where he made a multiple

(34:30):
choice quiz for his class.
As he's giving that quiz,they're sort of looking around
at him and going sir, what'sgoing on?
And he's not sure.
And so he looks around, goes toone of the smartest students in
the class who's alreadycompleted the quiz, and every
single answer is D.
All of the above, and so that'sright because it's technically

(34:50):
correct, but it's also wrongbecause that's not how we make
those quizzes.
So AR can be really wrong, itcan be a little bit wrong or it
can be right but wrong.
But the lowest commondenominator, fonz, is that we
just have to use our wisdom anddiscretion and subject matter
knowledge to be able to navigateit.
We have to treat it with what Iwould call a cheerful cynicism.
So we're not angry at the tools, we're not trying to always

(35:14):
second guess them.
We're grateful that we havereally powerful tools that allow
us to do this work of educationand do those evidence-based
practices more often for morelearners.
But we're always just keepinghalf an eye out and saying, well
, look, I'm remembering, I'm theexpert here and so not only am
I making sure that there'sfactual accuracy which is great

(35:34):
to make sure that we are able tosee there's no obvious
mistruths but also like analignment with where I'm coming
from as a teacher At my school.
We have vision, mission, values, attributes of a learner, these
sorts of things, consistentwhole school language.
That I just don't expect in amillion years.
Ai is going to get right on thefirst crack and that's why we

(35:57):
audit the AI.
With the OI, with the organicintelligence, I go well, look,
what song sheet am I singingfrom at my school?
And how can I talk about beinga courageous learner?
Or how can I talk aboutresilience that whole school
language in this lesson.
So I'm auditing that AI outputall the time and I'm not just
checking for factual accuracy,although that's really important

(36:19):
.
I'm also saying is this actuallyhelping form a cohesive body of
work?
So, as my student goes fromEnglish to science to maths,
they're hearing about the samedispositions, they're hearing
about the same vision andmission, they're hearing about
those same core themes as aschool, and of course, that's
one of the big things AI canhelp us do as well, isn't it,

(36:40):
fonz?
Because weaving in thoseattributes or those visions or
those dispositions that everyschool they'll have five or
seven of them Weaving them in islike the last thing we do in
our lesson and it's the firstthing that we leave off if we
run out of time.
So we make sure we have ourcontent and an engaging lesson,
but then all that bigger wholeschool narrative, shared

(37:01):
language, all that sort of stuffwell, it can quite easily not
be lived out.
It's just laminated and sit ona wall because we don't have the
time to meaningfully integrateit.
It's a great thing that we canuse artificial intelligence for,
but the big idea here is thatas educators and we talked about
this at the beginning of thepodcast we're the experts, right

(37:22):
, we understand what's going on,and not just from a content and
subject matter expertise anglealso, just from a like we are a
specific school, we're not ageneric school teaching generic
students.
We are a specific schoolteaching these students.
So how can we make sure thatactually our AIU still respects
that fact and we're not floodingour classroom with generic

(37:43):
beige resources but we'reactually being able to be more
tailored and more personalized,not only for our learners but
from our school perspective,than ever before?

Fonz (37:54):
Jason, how about yourself?

Jason Gulya (37:57):
Yeah, one of the things that constantly throws my
students for a loop and I teachAI, power communication I teach
AI in my courses and one of theideas that constantly throws
them for a loop is that theyneed a plan for engaging with AI
, that they actually needsomething, a process that they
can use, which many of them theyhad no idea.

(38:18):
So the vast majority of mystudents do come in and think
about or approach AI as a searchengine.
Right, they think it'ssomething you can just put
something in there and you canjust take it as it is.
And I give my students anexercise and I gave the high
school students the sameexercise yesterday.
I brought them into a room, Igave them a pen and a sheet of
paper and I said all right,here's the situation.

(38:39):
I gave them a scenario.
I said imagine you are doingyour work and you are given Carl
.
So your group is three to fourpeople.
You're given Carl.
Now here's the interesting thingabout Carl he's a genius.
No one really disputes that.
Everyone knows he's a genius,but it's a genie.
He's a genius because he goesonline and he just does the

(38:59):
Internet search.
He looks at Wikipedia and hehas a photographic memory.
He's not really reading, but hesort of just scans everything
and really holds on to it.
And I tell them, you know, thething about Carl is that if you
ask him a question and you canplay with the numbers depending
on what you see and say, 50% ofthe time he just regurgitates
what he read online.
He remembers something, grabsit from Wikipedia, gives it to

(39:22):
you, throws it at your door Cool.
25% of the time he's brilliant,he says something that's
counterintuitive and reallyinteresting, and then 25% of the
time he just gets it wrong, hemesses up, he brings in his own
biases, and so that 25% of thetime he's sort of just a wild
card.
You don't know what you'regoing to get out of him.

(39:44):
And so I had students on therejust a sheet of paper, come up
with a plan how are you going toapproach Carl in your group?
And then I had them gettogether, do a kind of pair and
share and create a plan forworking Carl into their group in
a meaningful way.
And yesterday when I did thisexercise, I had some of them say
we're just going to ignore Carl, we're not going to use Carl,

(40:08):
and I had others saying oh,we're going to give Carl a
handler.
Right, dan, you're going to bein charge of Carl, this is what
you're going to do, and we, likefleshed it out.
We said, all right, so what areyou going to do as a handler?
But you can say fact check, butwhat does that mean?
How are you going to fact checkhim?
And in my college class, this iswhen we talk about lateral
reading, which is really, formany of my students, becoming a

(40:30):
major way of reading content.
So for many of us, myselfincluded, when I think of
reading, I think vertical.
I think you start at the top ofthe page, whether it's an
actual book or a webpage, andyou just go at the top and you
read to the very end.
And one of the things thatwe're learning from literacy
studies is that for a lot of ourstudents, they're not really

(40:52):
reading that way much anymore,that they are reading laterally.
So as they go, they start atthe top and they go down.
As they do, that, they'reopening up windows on the side.
This is the lateral part.
So it's actually they'reopening up windows in their
browser, and this is actuallynow what I encourage my students
to do.
This is a way of fact checkingRight.

(41:12):
So if you have that output fromAI, looking at that paragraph
and if something sticks out toyou, do a search.
Nothing comes up Well, that's ared flag or a yellow flag but
saying, oh, cnn reported thesame thing, okay, cool.
And so you start to developthese processes, and so one of
the things that I've learnedwith my college students is that

(41:34):
if I can tell them to factcheck something, sometimes they
know how to do that.
Sometimes they don't.
Sometimes they see informationonline and I don't blame them
for this at all in a kind ofamorphous way, so it's hard to
figure out what is coming, whatinformation is coming from where
, and I try to teach my studentsprocesses to not have that
happen.

(41:55):
And it's a bit of a slog tryingto get them to make that pretty
big mindset shift so thatthey're not really thinking
about AI as a search engine butare really thinking about as
needing to use that organicintelligence.
And I feel a little bad everytime because I feel like I'm
constantly ruining AI for them,that they think it's going to be

(42:16):
this simple thing.
And then you come in and say,well, it's actually really hard
or requires all this additionalwork, and that's when it starts
to lessen the appeal a littlebit.
But I also think that's wherewe need to be if we are going to
have this kind of cheerfulcynicism and I love that phrase
from from Paul to really, reallyhelp us out and get the most
out of this technology and notlose ourselves in the process.

Fonz (42:37):
Great, great.
Well, as we start wrapping up,gentlemen, I have probably just
two last questions, and one ofthem that I really liked is just
the way that you close out yourbook.
Again, very practical book, alot of great tools, especially,
you know, for teachers in theclassroom, easy to understand
and, like I mentioned, thingsthat you can quickly turn around
and immediately use.
At least that's the way that Ifound it.

(42:58):
But one of the things that Ilike is that in your book it
says it ends with a commissionrather than a conclusion, and if
you don't mind, I would love tojust read this little section
here that says while most booksend with a conclusion, we end
our book with a commission.
In this context, a commissionis a hearty call to action, and
our call to action is thiscontinue to build on the

(43:20):
principles and practices you'velearned here.
And then I'm just going to skipto the last part here, where it
talks about the emergence of AIhas not changed the principles
and practices of good teaching,which is something that we've
hit on throughout this wholeconversation and even from the
very beginning.
So I want to ask you and I'llstart with Paul what specific

(43:41):
impact do you hope that you seethat this book creates in a
classroom for a teacher.

Paul Matthews (43:49):
Well, one of the things I hope that it gives
teachers is a real sense ofagency, that they're not sort of
under the tyranny of fathertime all the time, like we so
often, just feel the squeeze andwe feel like when there's the
odd freak wave of a week wherewe don't have a bunch of marking
to do or we don't have theparent teachers or the reports

(44:10):
aren't due, we can actuallycreate the sort of resources
that we really want to and thatwe know will help our learners.
I really hope this book allowseducators through the principles
and practices of wise AI usedto go.
You know what I can do allthose things.
I can create excellentresources for my learners
leveraging my wisdom, and I cando it all the time.

(44:31):
So that's one of the big things, because this is a parallel
subject, but I'll go there forjust a moment.
We're suffering a burnout crisisin education.
I see that in Australia westill have thousands.
We are three months into theschool year.
We have thousands of open jobs,job vacancies that are not
filled by teachers and we'rehaving a hard time getting

(44:51):
people to become teachers andwe're having a hard time keeping
our teachers as teachers.
A lot of my friends that I wentthrough university with now work
at a bank or they work for amortgage broker or they've
changed into parallel industries.
The closest I've ever come toburnout was not when I was
working long hours.
I'm probably working longerhours now these days than I've

(45:14):
ever worked in my life, and I'mincredibly satisfied because,
for me, my flirtation withburnout wasn't about working too
many hours, it was about nothaving an impact.
Actually, the closest I evercame to burnout was when I was
probably working less than ever,but I would walk into the
classroom, I'd teach and I'dleave and I would genuinely feel
that I had not made a dent.

(45:35):
And that crushed me as aneducator.
Because that's what you want todo.
You want to inspire the nextgeneration of learners, you want
to make a meaningful differencein people's lives.
And when you have theexperience of walking in and out
of that classroom hundreds andhundreds of times a term and
just feeling like you're notmaking a dent, I found that very
, very difficult to deal with.

(45:56):
And so what helps us make a dent?
Well, for me it was actuallythat evidence-based practice.
There's a stack of evidence.
I go where the evidence leadsand in my own anecdotal
experience, fonz.
I find it has a huge impact.
It's no surprise that thethings that the evidence shows
us help students read actuallydo help students read, and so
going into that classroom andleaving walking back out the

(46:19):
door knowing I have actuallyhelped that student take a step
in the right direction tobecoming a fluent reader and
writer Well, that not only helpsme feel good about my practice,
but I know that I'm having thatimpact that I so desperately
want to have.
So, when it comes to my hopesfor the book, yes, I hope this
trickles down to students andhelps them read and write

(46:41):
they're just crucial skills thatare only getting more important
but also, I hope it helpsteachers feel that real deep
sense of impact that is just sorewarding that it's just what we
want, what we got in theprofession to do.

Fonz (46:57):
So, jason, how about yourself?

Jason Gulya (47:00):
Yeah, I love that answer but I won't just take
Paul's answer A little bit on myown.
But one of the big things forme that came out of working on
this project and I return toagain and again as I think about
it more is just how valuablecommunity is that?
One of the big ideas I thinkvery much kind of built into

(47:20):
this book is that this is acommunal project.
Right If we're thinking aboutsomething like evidence-based
teaching.
Right If I wanted to thinkabout evidence-based teaching
and really really figure it out.
It can't just be me, it can'tjust be me in my silo.
And one of the things that hasreally happened to me over the
last two years especially andone of the things that has
really happened to me over thelast two years especially is I
become best friends with ourCCIT.
So they focus on teaching andlearning.

(47:41):
They have, you know, decades ofyou know more information than
I do about evidence basedlearning and I use them, I show
them things, I throw ideas bythem and say what do you think
about this?
And it can be very sort ofgeneral.
So one of the things that I dida few probably about a month or

(48:02):
so ago I asked them aboutpersonalized education.
What should I know about it?
What are the pros, what are thecons?
Right, and so, like, whatevidence do you have?
And I think that's that's alsoempowering, that's when we get a
you know agency built into it,when it doesn't have to just be
you, and that.
So that is very much areflection of my own story too.
The closest I got to justburning out was when I just was
on my own.
You know, quite a few years agoI was an adjunct, I was

(48:25):
teaching at a bunch ofinstitutions, and if you adjunct
in institutions, you don't haveany engagement.
You go, you teach and you runto the next college and you
teach there, and there'ssomething very weirdly isolating
about it.
And college and you teach there, and there's something very
weirdly isolating about it.
And so I think that reallyleaning into community and
working together as much as wepossibly can is really the only
way, in my mind, we can makethese adaptations, because I

(48:47):
think it's easy to sayevidence-based teaching, but we
have to figure out how to usecommunity to get to that, and
that's really where it becomes acommunal project.
And I think it's important thatthis is a co-authored book.
So Paul and I threw ideas backand forth and I think commission
is probably the moment when wethrew ideas back and forth the
most.
I think that's one of the oneswe went back and forth on.
I sent you something he's likewhat about this?
And you said what about this?

(49:07):
And we had a community that wasvery much built into the
writing process, gentlemen.

Fonz (49:19):
And the last question.
We'll do a little rapid firequestion.
We'll keep it at 15 seconds orless, but the question is this
if there's one piece of adviceeach of you would be able to
give an educator who's startingto explore AI for literacy
instruction, what would it be?
We'll start off with you, Jason.
For literacy instruction, whatwould it be?
We'll start off with you, Jason.

Jason Gulya (49:38):
Be as honest as you can about why literacy matters.
I think it's easy to miss that.
But, like, why is it importantto have literacy?
Be literate, however you wantto phrase it, and you know how
does it actually help us out injust being in the world.

Fonz (49:53):
Excellent.

Paul Matthews (49:55):
Paul, I would say you can't learn to ride a bike
at a seminar.
So the book is good, talkingabout it is good, but you just
have to roll up your sleeves andhave a go, and as soon as you
do, you realize you're not sofragile, you're not made out of
glass, the AI is not going tobreak you.
Actually, it'll be a far moreintuitive process than you think
.
So my big encouragement wouldbe roll up those sleeves and
have a go.

Fonz (50:16):
Something great advice, gentlemen.
Well, thank you so much forjust enlightening us with so
much you know, and I'm taking itall in and thank you, thank you
for this amazing resource.
Like I said, it's somethingthat's practical, easy to read,
and it's something one of thosethings, like you mentioned that
if you roll up your sleeve, youcan easily like, read a chapter,
read a section, and immediatelyjust turn around and try it out

(50:37):
.
And that's one of the things,too, that I encourage educators
to is just to improvise, adaptand overcome the technology will
be coming.
Take what you already know andsprinkle it onto what you're
already doing.
Great, and you can do it slowly.
You don't have to be aspeedboat, you can be a tugboat
or you can be a little bit of ananchor, but eventually, just
slowly continue to move towardsthe way of the current and just

(50:57):
continue to move forward, justlike these gentlemen have said,
and they continue to help outmany educators in doing the same
thing.
So, thank you both gentlemenfor being here today and just
sharing your knowledge and yourexperience and your expertise,
and this is a great book andwe'll make sure that we link
this in our show notes.
But, paul, I even forgot to askPaul where is it that our

(51:18):
audience members can go ahead?

Paul Matthews (51:20):
and find this book.
Great question, so glad youasked so you can head to Amazon.
It's available on Amazon as aphysical copy and it's also
available as an ebook.

Fonz (51:31):
Perfect, excellent, we'll make sure we link that in the
show notes, all right, but,gentlemen, we're still not done.
I always love to end the showwith these last three questions,
just to kind of get a littlebit more, you know, I don't know
, maybe a little lighthearted alittle bit, even though the
conversation has been great.
I love it.
But we'll go ahead and startwith you, paul, you being a
first time guest, jason'salready kind of familiar with
the questions.
But, paul, you being a firsttime guest, I'm going to start

(51:53):
with you.
As we know, every superhero hasan origin story and every
superhero always also has aweakness or a pain point.
For Superman, kryptonite washis weakness or pain point.
And I want to ask you, in thecurrent state of education, paul
, what would you say is yourcurrent edu-kryptonite?

Paul Matthews (52:16):
Honestly, I always feel like I'm in a rush,
I feel like I don't have enoughtime, and that's one of the
reasons I got so excited aboutAI.
But I feel like there's afrantic nature to teaching.
It often attends the experienceof most teachers just that we
are under the pump, you finallyget your teaching and learning
sequence done and then you losefour periods to a carnival and

(52:38):
three periods to standardizedtesting and these sorts of
things.
So that's what I feel, but ofcourse, that problem can quite
easily be turned into a seriesof possibilities.
I think, with AI helps me solvethe time crunch crisis.
So, yeah, that would be mykryptonite, though, fonz.
Excellent, paul Jason.

Jason Gulya (52:56):
I get stuck in my own head.
I have a hard time.
I get just excited about things.
I want to work it out fully inmy own mind and I need that
additional push to talk to theother person, talk to the
student.
So I get stuck in my own headand sometimes that works out
well and sometimes it just meansthat something that
hypothetically seemed like itcould work it just doesn't.
So I'm trying to find ways topush against that, but that's my

(53:19):
kryptonite.

Fonz (53:20):
Oh, excellent.
Thank you so much, gentlemen.
Great answers, Jason.
I'm going to start with you forthis next one.
If you could have a billboardwith anything on it, what would
it be and why?

Jason Gulya (53:30):
Process over product, just really find ways
to value the present.
I think that many of us we wantto like jump past it.
We want to get to the pointwhere we figure this all out or
we produce that thing.
I think one of the best thingswe can do just focus on the
process.
Students need to do that too,right?
Learning is a process.
Doing something is somethingthat you know, you learn by

(53:52):
doing.
Right.
You can't just learn to ride abike in a seminar.
You need to go, you need to doit, and that really requires
this kind of process mindset.
So, for me, just being able toenjoy the present, even though
we all want to focus on thefuture and everything like that,
is just so important foractually making learning
meaningful.

Fonz (54:10):
Excellent, Paul.
How about you?
What would your billboard say?

Paul Matthews (54:13):
My billboard would say education isn't about
producing work, it's aboutproducing work, it's about
producing people, and that's abig message that I'm excited
about.
Right, so it's not about doingthe work, it's about producing a
certain kind of person, andthat's a vision of education I'm
really excited about.

Fonz (54:28):
Excellent, Great.
All right, Paul.
Last question We'll start offwith you.
If you can trade places withanyone, anyone for one day, who
would it be and why?

Paul Matthews (54:39):
Honestly, I'd trade places with Jason.
I've never tried out highereducation before and I'm hoping
it comes across my path sometime.
I've never taught in auniversity and as I look into my
future, I think, hmm, yeah,that would be pretty interesting
.
Maybe I'll give that a go oneday.

Fonz (54:54):
There you go.
Excellent Jason.
How about yourself?
Who would you switch places forwith a day before it?

Jason Gulya (54:59):
is a nice answer, and I'm not going to give a nice
answer.
I'm going to give one that'sjust completely random.
If I could trade places withone person, it would be
Christopher Nolan, which is thisvery weird because he is the
only person who I can think ofthat just gets like these really
massive just projects he can doand kind of go wherever he
wants with it, and so I'm very,very envious of him being able

(55:22):
to do that and envious of hisartistry.
That's the person to just thinklike it would be cool to just
have this limitless amount ofmoney where you can use really,
really ambitious things.
But it also gets me away fromeducation, but I love movies, so
that's there.

Fonz (55:35):
Well, gentlemen, again it was a pleasure speaking with you
Paul Matthews, joining us in anearly Saturday morning from
Australia, Jason joining us herefrom the States what an
international show.
This is wonderful.
Thank you both for this greatexperience and thank you both
for what you continue to do.
Please, for all our audiencemembers, if you're not following

(55:56):
Paul or Jason on socials,mainly on LinkedIn they put up
some great stuff on LinkedIn.
Make sure you follow them.
If you have any questions,please just even put it in their
comments and they're verygracious at answering and all
they want to do is really help.
And, of course, you've got twodifferent viewpoints.
You've got, you know, kind oflike the high school, I would
say you know, in that K-12 space, and then, of course, you've

(56:17):
got the higher ed space also aswell.
So please make sure you reachout to them.
And, of course, guys, if youwant more episodes and more just
, high quality content andconversations like this, please
make sure you visit our websiteat myedtechlife myedtechlife
where you can check out thisamazing episode and the other
317 episodes, where, I promiseyou, you will find a little

(56:39):
something that you can sprinkleonto what you are already doing.
Great, and, as always.
Thank you so much to oursponsors Book Creator, yellowdig
, eduaid.
Thank you so much for believingin our mission and thank you so
much for making these showshappen.
We really appreciate you fromthe bottom of my heart, but my
friends also.
As always, until next time,don't forget, stay, techie you.