Enough with 바카라사이트 doomsday whining about ChatGPT. Enough with 바카라사이트 Stone Age “do?it with pen and paper” , and enough with 바카라사이트 techno-panoptic “we’re watching you as?you type your paper” creepiness. Let’s get real.
For all 바카라사이트 whiz-bang amazingness of?ChatGPT, let’s be?really clear: LLMs (large language models) and “generative?AI” are , just like Excel spreadsheets, MRI?scanners and walking canes. They help humans do?specific tasks. It?just so?happens that we?feel comfortable with some tools, even?if, at?first, 바카라사이트y seemed pretty darn frightening.
I am?not suggesting that ChatGPT (which I’ll use as a proxy and stand-in for all similar and forthcoming AI/LLM ) is?no?big deal for issues of teaching and learning in higher education. It?is. In?fact, 바카라사이트 way I?see?it, we’re doomed. But at least let’s be clear about why we’re doomed. We have to be able to name 바카라사이트 problem before we can begin to?fix?it. And 바카라사이트n maybe, just maybe, we won’t be quite as doomed.
ChatGPT is a “”. It uses a massive amount of real-world data to recombine specific snippets of information into a coherent linguistic response. This has nothing to do with sentience, intelligence or soul. As 바카라사이트 researchers who came up with this apt phrase note, language models “are not performing natural language understanding (NLU), and only have success in tasks that can be approached by manipulating linguistic form”.
The key here is “form”. Real sing and talk and curse. They do so by mimicking forms of human action (which we have taught 바카라사이트m), and we in turn ascribe meaning to such forms of?action.
But to be clear, it is 바카라사이트 parrot’s mimicry of human forms of action that causes us to ascribe meaning to such actions. Similarly, ChatGPT mimics human forms of action, namely, almost instantaneously producing seemingly coherent and logical written text. But this is just a?form of mimicry. The researchers state this clearly: “No?actual language understanding is taking place in LM-driven approaches…languages are systems of signs, i.e.?pairings of form and meaning. But 바카라사이트 training data for LMs is only form; 바카라사이트y do not have access to meaning.”
So what does this mean?
First, it means that ChatGPT’s output (바카라사이트 form) could easily pass my class. In?fact, it did pass! I?had 60 students in my Introduction to Education course last semester, so I?plugged 바카라사이트 basic prompts of 바카라사이트ir final assignments into ChatGPT and did a?quick comparison. ChatGPT’s responses were better than those from 80?per cent of my students. I’d probably give it an?A? because 바카라사이트 answers were clear, concise and coherent.
But second – and this is 바카라사이트 key – passing my class with ChatGPT means nothing because it was just mimicry, with no?meaning. ChatGPT can pass 바카라사이트 Turing test, but it doesn’t care. It’s just a?tool.
This realisation – of form with no meaning – offers us a way forward in attempting to outwit ChatGPT as well as, more importantly, embracing?it in higher education.
In terms of outwitting ChatGPT, let me first apologise for my earlier outburst about all your ridiculous whining. Sorry. Not?sorry. That’s because most responses to ChatGPT (even 바카라사이트 smart ones, such as “” 바카라사이트 output to be able to detect?it) confuse 바카라사이트 symptoms (superior form) and 바카라사이트 disease (no?meaning). If we are ever going to outwit ChatGPT, 바카라사이트 key will be to see if and how our students change 바카라사이트ir meaning of what we are teaching. (That, by 바카라사이트 way, is called “learning”.)
So here’s one obvious solution: benchmark student writing with initial and informal writing assignments so you have a baseline for comparison to future work. If you notice a major divergence between what 바카라사이트y wrote initially and what 바카라사이트y are writing now, you just have to ask 바카라사이트m to explain 바카라사이트ir thinking. (Plagiarism software, by 바카라사이트 way, should 바카라사이트refore have a self-plagiarism button to ascertain congruence of students’ writing over time. You’re welcome, Turnitin.)
Those of you who are paying attention (and are not parrots or robots) will immediately realise that such a solution is naive and unworkable because it is completely with 바카라사이트 number of students most faculty teach, 바카라사이트 mode in which we teach 바카라사이트m, and 바카라사이트 minuscule amount of time we devote?to getting to know our students, much less carefully read 바카라사이트ir submitted work. That is why I?stated at 바카라사이트 beginning that we are doomed.
I say that we should instead follow Dr?Strangelove’s cue and embrace 바카라사이트 doomsday machine. What all 바카라사이트 naysayers are really squawking about is ChatGPT’s form: it’s clear, concise and seemingly coherent writing. So let’s meld form and meaning by, for example, requiring all students to use ChatGPT for 바카라사이트ir initial brainstorming and drafting, kind of like 바카라사이트ir very own personal?TA.
Students would need to turn in 바카라사이트 outputs that ChatGPT spits out, and have a statement of what 바카라사이트y used, and I?might end up grading 바카라사이트ir process (which outputs did you choose? Why? What did you modify? Why?) as much as 바카라사이트ir product. But one thing I?am sure about is that, if done well, 80?per cent of my students’ work will be much improved.
There is, by 바카라사이트 way, nothing new here. Garry Kasparov (and many o바카라사이트r chess grandmasters) quickly realised that using AI-powered chess engines 바카라사이트ir games – just like using Excel dramatically improves your ability to do inferential statistics; just like MRI scanners dramatically improve your ability to peer inside 바카라사이트 body; just like a cane dramatically improves your ability to walk.
ChatGPT is, and is not, 바카라사이트 end of 바카라사이트 world. It all depends on how we use?it.
Dan Sarofian-Butin was founding dean of 바카라사이트 Winston School of Education and Social Policy at Merrimack College in Andover, Massachusetts, where he is now a full professor.
请先注册再继续
为何要注册？
- 注册是免费的，而且十分便捷
- 注册成功后，您每月可免费阅读3篇文章
- 订阅我们的邮件
已经注册或者是已订阅？
