Wednesday, January 25, 2023

Artificial intelligence will change education but the sky is not falling

 Charles Ungerleider, Professor Emeritus, The University of British Columbia

[permission to reproduce granted if authorship is acknowledged]

School officials in New York City have banned or blocked ChatGPT, the chatbot I wrote about last week. They are worried about students using it to do their homework and write essays. A spokesperson for the New York school system, Jenna Lyle, said, “While the tool may be able to provide quick and easy answers to questions, it does not build critical-thinking and problem-solving skills, which are essential for academic and lifelong success.”

It has always been my view that teachers are primarily responsible for building critical-thinking and problem-solving skills. Teachers do that by instructing students in the application of standards of judgment, logic, and canons of evidence.  However, if one were to apply the standard to which Lyle refers, New York would be banning almost every educational support in use today: textbooks, worksheets, manipulatives, microscopes, encyclopaedias, the periodic table, etc. I do not want to block access to those conventional educational support materials. Nor do I want to block access to or use of ChatGPT.

Kids with resources have been getting help writing essays and doing homework since before I was born. Essay mills flourished long before the advent of the internet. If you were privileged, you could pay to have someone – sometimes underpaid teachers – write an essay for you. Or you could obtain an essay from a friend’s older sibling or an older relative.

Parents – at least those who have the luxury of time – frequently help their kids with homework. The affluent can afford tutors or “academic coaches” – often retired teachers or teachers who are moonlighting.

I am not a fan of homework. Its impact is small and the stress it causes kids and parents is not worth what few, small benefits it produces. For students who work to support themselves or their families, homework is more than a minor irritant. So, let’s stop giving homework.

I do not think the ban or block that the officials in New York have instituted will have an appreciable impact on the use of the chatbot, nor should it.  I think students should be using the chatbot to write essays and do research.  In fact, school officials should be encouraging its use for essay writing and for investigating issues. Yes, you read that right. I said that teachers should be encouraging students to use artificial intelligence to help them learn to verify the accuracy and test the logic of the bot.

Students should be required to use the chatbot to write the first draft of their essay. Then, and this is crucial, they should be required to verify the accuracy of the information contained in the essays by citing at least two credible, independent sources for each claim. They should also be required to name any of the logical gaps in the bot’s argument, explaining what the gap is and addressing the gap.

In last week’s blog, the chatbot wrote:

Artificial intelligence (AI) has the potential to revolutionize the way we teach and learn, particularly in elementary and secondary schools. In recent years, there has been a growing trend towards incorporating AI into education, with a range of applications that can support teachers and enhance the learning experience for students.

If this were the first draft of the essay prepared by the chatbot, I would expect students to supply evidence of the growing trend and the range of applications. I would want evidence that the use of AI would produce a radical change (revolutionize) teaching and learning because the changes mentioned in the essay seem to be enhancements of current practice. They do not seem to be significant departures from what teachers and students currently do.

I would also expect students to provide references for the claims made in the essay. For example, the chatbot claims, “these programs use data and machine learning algorithms to tailor learning experiences to the individual needs and abilities of each student.” I would expect some reference to adaptive testing and to “the use of virtual assistants or chatbots . . . to answer students' questions, provide feedback on assignments, and offer support and guidance as needed.

Artificial Intelligence is not the threat perceived by the New York City education system. It does, however, hold promise for supporting teaching and learning in the manner described in the bot’s essay, if employed thoughtfully.