Tess Bernhard
@tessbern.bsky.social
Postdoc @ Penn GSE | 2024 NAEd/Spencer diss fellow | science teacher educator | thinking/worrying about how edtech is reshaping classroom teaching www.tessbernhard.com
Reposted by Tess Bernhard
"Help you read faster" is so dishonest lol, like yeah if you consider "not doing the reading" as "reading faster"
October 20, 2025 at 12:52 PM
"Help you read faster" is so dishonest lol, like yeah if you consider "not doing the reading" as "reading faster"
Reposted by Tess Bernhard
I have a theory - much like how if you live in New York City for long enough you become culturally Jewish in a way, if you hang out online for too long you end up culturally Philadelphian
September 15, 2025 at 1:09 AM
I have a theory - much like how if you live in New York City for long enough you become culturally Jewish in a way, if you hang out online for too long you end up culturally Philadelphian
Reposted by Tess Bernhard
2. the strange but often repeated cultish mantra that we need to "embrace the future" — this is so bizarre given, e.g. how destructive industry forces have proven to be in science, from petroleum to tobacco to pharmaceutical companies.
(Section 3.2 here doi.org/10.5281/zeno...)
4/n
(Section 3.2 here doi.org/10.5281/zeno...)
4/n
![3.2 We do not have to ‘embrace the future’ & we can turn back the tide
It must be the sheer magnitude of [artificial neural networks’] incompetence that makes
them so popular.
Jerry A. Fodor (2000, p. 47)
Related to the rejection of expertise is the rejection of imagining a better future and the rejection
of self-determination free from industry forces (Hajer and Oomen 2025; Stengers 2018; van Rossum
2025). Not only AI enthusiasts, but even some scholars whose expertise concentrates on identifying
and critically interrogating ideologies and sociotechnical relationships — such as historians and gender scholars — unfortunately fall prey to the teleological belief that AI is an unstoppable force. They
embrace it because alternative responses seem too difficult, incompatible with industry developments,
or non-existent. Instead of falling for this, we should “refuse [AI] adoption in schools and colleges,
and reject the narrative of its inevitability.” (Reynoldson et al. 2025, n.p., also Benjamin 2016; Campolo and Crawford 2020; CDH Team and Ruddick 2025; Garcia et al. 2022; Kelly et al. 2025; Lysen
and Wyatt 2024; Sano-Franchini et al. 2024; Stengers 2018). Such rejection is possible and has historical precedent, to name just a few successful examples: Amsterdammers kicked out cars, rejecting
that cycling through the Dutch capital should be deadly. Organised workers died for the eight-hour
workday, the weekend and other workers’ rights, and governments banned chlorofluorocarbons from
fridges to mitigate ozone depletion in the atmosphere. And we know that even the tide itself famously
turns back. People can undo things; and we will (cf. Albanese 2025; Boztas 2025; Kohnstamm Instituut 2025; van Laarhoven and van Vugt 2025). Besides, there will be no future to embrace if we deskill
our students and selves, and allow the technology industry’s immense contributions to climate crisis](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:vsyj5jtayxcq5dw5mtja4xtb/bafkreidzio5vcvzus3xjqxcpav64pwk2gwslwslogabl7b5dzhn6egf37i@jpeg)
September 6, 2025 at 8:24 AM
2. the strange but often repeated cultish mantra that we need to "embrace the future" — this is so bizarre given, e.g. how destructive industry forces have proven to be in science, from petroleum to tobacco to pharmaceutical companies.
(Section 3.2 here doi.org/10.5281/zeno...)
4/n
(Section 3.2 here doi.org/10.5281/zeno...)
4/n
Both helpful tidbits to consider, ty! 2/3 reviews are some of the most positive I've ever gotten, one explicitly asked for only minor revisions. The negative review asks for v addressable nuance in a few spots. I'll likely keep my pride in tact & move on, but am tempted to politely nudge the editor
August 11, 2025 at 9:12 PM
Both helpful tidbits to consider, ty! 2/3 reviews are some of the most positive I've ever gotten, one explicitly asked for only minor revisions. The negative review asks for v addressable nuance in a few spots. I'll likely keep my pride in tact & move on, but am tempted to politely nudge the editor
In all likelihood I will simply take the L and move on from this journal and to a new one, but my pride wants the editors to more carefully consider the extremely affirming feedback two of the reviewers provided that seem overlooked in the summary 🥲
August 11, 2025 at 8:39 PM
In all likelihood I will simply take the L and move on from this journal and to a new one, but my pride wants the editors to more carefully consider the extremely affirming feedback two of the reviewers provided that seem overlooked in the summary 🥲