Chat GPT in Education
By ARYAN AGARWAL, SUNGHYUN BAE, and AARYAN PATEL
ChatGPT has had significant impacts in various ways over the past year, capturing the attention of the Exeter community and beyond. The widespread adoption of this groundbreaking technology has raised concerns among educators. There’s a growing apprehension that students may exploit ChatGPT to their ultimate detriment, potentially hindering their educational progress. This has ignited a debate about the appropriateness of incorporating ChatGPT in academic settings. At Exeter, our primary mission is to provide a robust educational foundation, nurturing students’ critical thinking skills in the classroom. However, the Academy has yet to add a section to the E-Book concerning the use of artificial intelligence (AI) in the classroom. It has been pushed under the umbrella of plagiarism, failing to draw clear boundaries as to its appropriate uses. Improvements in the future of Large Language Models (LLMs) will open gateways to new possibilities for the exploitation of this technology.
The Exeter community agreed with the idea of the appropriate use of LLMs benefiting students. Instructor in English Michelle Dionne presented concerns about the use of AI. “I think that’s one of the hardest parts of thinking, to organize your thoughts. If you give it to somebody else to do, you aren’t learning.”
Jinmin Lee agreed and said, “You need to have an understanding of the work that you are asking it to do. You’re not thinking critically, and then you don’t have a clear idea of your own work and that is dangerous.” However, Lee also believed that “LLMs can be used as an extension to existing tools to automate certain mundane tasks better,” while Ms. Dionne stated that it is almost like asking a friend to look over your work and give some pointers. Mr. Cosgrove in the Physics department believes that the tool can allow for new gateways for learning, but creates concern for the academic integrity of students’ work. Both expressed their concerns about what ChatGPT may do to analytical thinking, which is currently valued so much in education, but also addressed how it can be helpful if students need assistance.
We must also acknowledge the immense potential that LLMs bring to the table. These cutting-edge technologies, when thoughtfully integrated into traditional education, can significantly enhance students’ efficiency. However, we must tread carefully, to not cross the line between efficiency and education. Kevin Roose of the New York Times suggests that schools could consider treating LLMs as calculators, allowing them for certain assignments while prohibiting their use in others. LLMs, like calculators in mathematics, can serve as valuable tools to relieve students of the burden of repetitive and time-consuming tasks, allowing them to focus on higher-order thinking and creativity. However, it’s crucial to establish clear guidelines for their usage. This approach would promote responsible and ethical use of LLMs, ensuring they remain a boon to education rather than a potential threat. Just one example of LLMs positively impacting our instruction is by assisting in research and enhancing student efficiency as they write papers. Additionally, they can summarize crucial points, simplifying the note-taking process for students.
The concerns raised by the National Education Association and other academia regarding the threat that AI poses to academic integrity are both valid and worth considering. The use of LLMs opens the door to potential issues such as cheating and plagiarism, which must be addressed. Nonetheless, ChatGPT can be effectively used, not just by students, but by teachers who are looking to enhance the experience that students have. According to the American Psychological Association, incorporating ChatGPT into classes will encourage students to be more “tech-literate” in an increasingly techno-centric world. They will learn how to properly wield the power of LLMs, and use them to their benefit, not their hindrance.
Though we may be saying goodbye to the traditional style of teaching, that doesn’t mean that this new one is any worse — it could even be better. By implementing pragmatic policies, we can mitigate the downsides of the use of LLMs while using them to enhance the way that students learn.
