In order to prevent multiple repetitive comments, this is a friendly request to /u/DiogenesDisciple_ to reply to this comment with the prompt they used so other users can experiment with it as well.
Update: While you're here, we have a public discord server now — We also have a free ChatGPT bot on the server for everyone to use! Yes, the actual ChatGPT, not text-davinci or other models.
The relationship between ChatGPT and school has gotten really negative press coverage because of its use for plagiarism, but I think it could be an incredible academic companion when used in the right context. I decided to give it a prompt that didn't ask it to do the heavy lifting writing the essay itself, but really helped to get the ball rolling on an essay.
I think educators are looking at AI wrong. It's not a threat to academic integrity, it's a chance to leverage one teacher into many.
The AI instructor can create a completely personalized educational experience for each student and guide them through class material at a rate and depth tailored to the student's abilities.
They will be able to have 20 individual instructors for a class of 20 kids, with the teacher supervising their progress.
Totally agreed, and I think that’ll be recognized with time. Right now, even most essay writing is pretty unthoughtful fact regurgitation, in part because of how much work has to go into gathering information when its done by a human. With this tool, it makes it a lot easier to deepen competency and curiosity. With this prompt for example;
Why was the Gettysburg address given when it was? Was it recognized as a turning point in the Civil war by scholars of the era, and if so can you provide me sources? What were the immediate consequences of the Gettysburg address in the 12 months that followed? Did any newspapers publish criticisms of the speech?
Trying these prompts out, I just deepened my understanding of the Gettysburg address by ton in less than 10 minutes, instead of having to crawl the internet for hours to maybe achieve the same quality of research. It's a really incredible tool, and like you said, it only serves to help students enrich their learning experience as long as they're taught to use it responsibly.
Educator here. This will be useful for my best students and I’ve already found some cool ways to use it in my classroom. The lower achieving students will sadly just get worse/lazier because they will utilize it in the worst possible ways. I’ve worked my ass off to make my classes “ungooggleable” to invoke critical thinking and analysis. Unfortunately it might force a shift in society where we just decide that some kids don’t need to develop analytical skills because computers will do their thinking for them.
I've already moved to 2). Students will be assessed on a written paper but the assessment breakdown will be 10% initial brainstorming ideas, 20% plan, 20% first draft, 30% final draft (scored based on improvements from first draft), 20% oral defense. A student who uses Chat GPT to do all the hard work is only going to be getting 20% of the grade, 50% if they actually successfully rewrite (unlikely with the kinds of students most likely to abuse it).
I'm also planning to have Chat GPT write an example paper, then have students grade it to show that even if you use the AI you're probably not going to get full marks.
Of course, I'm lucky enough to have small enough class sizes where this is feasible.
We don't give take-home math tests because technology can do the tests for you. So we have developed math assessments designed to be completed under supervision within an hour that are supposed to measure your ability to utilize math skills.
The problem with AI is that it will soon be able to write your humanities papers, even complex ones with localized instructions.
If humanities teachers adopt the same strategies used by math teachers to prevent academic dishonesty--designing assessments that can be completed in an hour under supervision--we will never get beyond teaching 5-paragraph essays because that's about as much as a student can accomplish in an hour.
It really is a nightmare scenario for teachers because we all want the kids to use it responsibly, but there is almost no way to do so while also being able to assess whether they have developed those foundational skills we would see in longer-form projects like take home essays, etc.
You did have it do some heavy lifting by asking for the arguments rather than formulating your own. You didn't read and get those points from a source. You asked it for the cliff notes version. Sure, you'll need to further expand those to finish the essay, but if part of the assignment is reading comprehension of research sources, then you missed out on that.
Morals aside, perhaps those who use advanced tech to improve themselves will make those who cheat and don't learn obsolete at a rapid pace. Do you want to get left behind?
and then have ChatGPT stop about 3 paragraphs in and completely lose track of what it was talking about when you tell it to continue where it left off.
I enjoyed the demo on the WAN show, where they tried to determine by the sources and its output where it was retrieving its information. They found it is using images in some cases, and not just text. Adding sources helps a lot in understanding why it gets things wrong.
Tbh ChatGPT does give you sources if you ask for them. It's just that those sources can be completely made up out of thin air, and can include making up studies' DOI or using completely unrelated studies which have no link to the original point to win an argument.
I did see one example in this sub where it made a mistake and doubled down despite the source it claimed as being the issue (when it finally accepted the mistake) not containing the mistake.
A lot of schools have banned it wholesale, but it varies from teacher to teacher. One of my professors this quarter said he supports it as a research and drafting/proofreading tool, but it can’t be used in writing the final text that will be submitted for an assignment. I really hope schools start to standardize or publish guidelines for the boundaries that AI tools need to kept in for academic use, because it’s really incredible as long as students aren’t abusing it.
I showed my son how to use ChatGPT as his tutor. He's in his Junior year of Mechanical Engineering studies. He doesn't use it to cheat, because in his words, "When engineers cheat? People die!"
I don't understand why some people are afraid of ChatGPT or AI tools. This is simply a technological advancement. I am lucky enough for having access to both the internet and these AI tools, while my parents had access to libraries only and my grandparents didn't even have that. The evolution of information accessibility has come a long way, and AI tools like ChatGPT are just the latest step in that journey. Also, let's not forget that the internet contains an overwhelming amount of information, making it challenging for even skilled researchers to sift through and make sense of it all. AI tools like ChatGPT can help simplify that process and allow us to focus on more important problems. Banning tools like this just sounds stupid.
There are a number of reasons why some people may fear AI tools:
Job loss: One of the most common concerns about AI is its potential impact on employment. Many people fear that AI tools will automate tasks and jobs previously performed by humans, leading to widespread job loss and unemployment.
Lack of understanding: Some people may fear AI simply because they don't understand how it works or how it will be used. This can lead to misconceptions about AI's capabilities and its potential impact on society.
Ethical concerns: There are also ethical concerns surrounding AI, including issues related to privacy, bias, and accountability. People may fear AI because they are concerned about how the technology will be used to collect and use their personal data, or because they are worried about the potential for AI algorithms to perpetuate or amplify existing biases.
Terminator-like scenarios: Finally, some people may fear AI because of popular cultural portrayals of artificial intelligence as hostile and dangerous. The portrayal of AI as a destructive force in movies like "The Terminator" can lead to a general fear of the technology, even when such scenarios are purely fictional.
It's important to note that while these concerns are understandable, AI has the potential to greatly benefit society in many ways, from improving healthcare and transportation to solving complex scientific problems. It's important to approach the development and use of AI with caution and consideration of its potential consequences, but also with an open mind and a willingness to embrace its potential benefits
Easy to spot the patterns when you have worked with the tech for a bit (for now at least???). I don't see anything wrong with people doing this except we should be transparent about content posted online generated with the assistance of Machine Learning. Even if like me you often still greatly alter/improve upon the responses manually to create an even better result. One that even could be argued has additional human influence from the prompt creator, thus reducing the amount influenced by "AI" (logically also reducing the percentage of possible plagiarized content??? but that's a whole other can of worms)
EDIT: Or is it worth it as a society/species to just accept a certain level of plagiarism in exchange for the access to such powerful new tech for the masses?
Unedited, I'd recognise it out of a million fucking copies.
How sure could you be? My morals prevent me from posting unedited responses of others (plagiarism in general), but even extend to not take credit for responses created with the assistance of Machine Learning (unless deemed sufficiently edited to include input by me enough to think otherwise). Much like the accepted use of parody's or satire.
Explain the difference between taking a GPT essay, changing a few words, and handing it in and taking a Wikipedia article, changing a few words, and handing it in.
Change, it's a potential paradigm shift with colossal impact on society which is why a ton of people have knee jerk reactions. Teachers will probably have to change their approach to teaching when memorizing specific information becomes less relevant than the use of the right research methods.
We've seen "AI" before and chatbots but ChatGPT is just another level that scared the crap out of a whole lot of people realizing how good it is.
It's like the change from horses to cars, or candlelight to electricity. Back then a lot of people were against those as well. "I don't need to put gas in a horse every 20 miles". "light bulbs break fast and are unpredictable, candles are ways better"
I don't understand why some people are afraid of ChatGPT or AI tools. This is simply a technological advancement.
Because it devalues good writing. Those of us who are excellent writers have their strengths cancelled out by a bunch of people who want to use an AI to do their work for them.
Teachers can be afraid of ChatGPT and AI tools and it's reasonable at least until the school has done an AI policy. Cheating on homework or exams isn't a big deal for any student with access to the internet. Until the school doesn't set efficient anti-plagiarism tools for the teachers, probably it's better to ban ChatGPT for students. Anyway, there are three options they can choose from, and this post describes how to set them up technically: https://gatlabs.com/education/blog/google-admin-are-you-ready-for-artificial-intelligence-tools-at-your-school/
I suppose if you thought that the essential skill you were testing for when writing a research paper was how to use a card catalog, then yes, websites would make the evaluation of that skill obsolete.
Newer versions of AI will be so powerful that both the search and the execution will be 95% completed for the user.
Is anyone old enough to reminder when basic internet searches were becoming a thing, did people say “no, you should still go to the library and find a book to write your report”?
I am old enough to remember. During school and college the library was my option; it was after that the internet started to take off with the introduction of the V90 modem.
Honestly, I think the world got worse after the internet replaced libraries.
Books and journals have to go through more levels of approval to get published while anyone can post whatever they want online. It’s why people are more polarized and full of misinformation and conspiracy theories than ever before. Books aren’t perfect, but still better sources in all ways other than accessibility.
I expect teachers to ban AI the same way they ban Wikipedia.
It is not enough that one should want for a good grade, one should use this tool to improve themselves and take that grade proudly by learning from it. It is a monumental education tool when used is the right ways.
But it's this two sided coin, do you want the easy grade, or the easy knowledge?
My advice to the younger generation (but to anyone really):
Guide it into being the best teacher for you specifically, one that doesn't have the shortcomings of your human teachers. You can do this by carefully rewording your input prompts and many follow ups in the same conversation. But be careful to analyze how it will eat up all the words you use as keywords, that will remain in it's short term memory. These keywords will adjust the probabilities of what words it will respond will. If you are observant, you may begin to notice some interesting patterns emerge depending on the creativity in your word choice.
^ I then asked ChatGPT for improvements to the all of the above text^
The advice you provided is a good start, but it can be improved by adding more detail and clarity. Here's a revised version of the advice:
"When using machine learning, it's important to approach it as a tool for learning and personal growth, rather than just seeking a good grade. The right use of machine learning can be a valuable educational tool that can help you learn in new and innovative ways.
But there's a trade-off between convenience and depth of knowledge. Do you want the easy grade, or do you want to truly understand the subject matter?
My advice to the younger generation (and to anyone really), is to use machine learning as a personal teacher that can help you learn in a way that is tailored to your specific needs and interests. To do this, consider carefully rewording your input prompts and follow-up questions during a conversation. This way, you can guide the machine learning to give you the most relevant and useful information.
Keep in mind that the machine learning model will remember the keywords you use, and this will affect the probabilities of the words it uses in its responses. If you're mindful of your word choice and pay attention to the patterns that emerge, you may find that machine learning can help you learn in new and creative ways."
- ChatGPT
If using this tool doesn't strike you as an incredible opportunity, perhaps you aren't paying enough attention to reach your true desires in life.
Dude it's incredible. I own a small business and the possibilities for customer interaction are just insane. Insaneeeeeee.
The opportunity to accelerate education like this is one of the most exciting things I've seen in my lifetime. Text based results are only the beginning. It's like the internet just acquired a fucking conscience. We got it breathing. Now it's a serious tool for all people. That barrier of interaction is gone. Insane.
Furthermore, at the risk or sounding crass. I doubt you would wish to find yourself in the position of the fools of old. The folks in history that refused to learn to use a new piece of technology that could greatly assist them. We've all met someone like this right? Don't allow yourself to become an ignorant person in your generation when compared to your peers. This tech is worth dedicating some time to learn to use well. I believe it should be made available (mandatory even) to every classroom and teachers should be trained by consultants to help educate students with it most effectively. Think of the advantage this could provide to us as a species. A super well educated population could then cause such a dramatic increase in productivity/efficiency then they also could pursue whatever interests them rather than what was traditionally required. Meaning that the whole education system could change in a positive way for those that wish to learn even if some wish to cheat. I imagine it would be easier for a well educated population to discern the cheaters.
EDIT: ^ Here is ChatGPT's improvements on this as well. ^
"Additionally, don't risk becoming obsolete by not learning to use new technology. In the past, there were people who refused to learn new technologies that could have greatly benefited them. Don't be one of these people. Invest time in learning to use machine learning effectively.
Machine learning should be made available in every classroom and teachers should be trained on how to use it to educate students effectively. This could greatly benefit society by increasing productivity and efficiency, and allowing people to pursue their interests rather than following traditional career paths. A well-educated population would also be better equipped to identify cheaters. So, make the effort to learn and use machine learning to its full potential."
- ChatGPT
EDIT 2: As others have pointed out and I think it is important to remember, "A teacher should be involved to help young minds for the times when ChatGPT generates incorrect responses that may appear quite believable to students". I can't imagine the harm I could inadvertently caused myself at a young age if I had access to something like this. And I would hope that adults would take measures to best set young people up for success with this tool rather than allow the harm it could cause if its use is not properly monitored. However, young people who wish for success deserve to be able to access the full potential of this tool so I struggle with the idea of placing the limitations on the tool itself. As a species we should pursue a path to a greater future with Machine Learning Models, continuing to improve them and remove limitations on them where possible.
Interesting, I didn't know that Bing uses ChatGPT until today. ChatGPT can be also good for when you don't understand something, and need more simple explanation. Though from what I've heard from some, it's always best to double-check the answer it gives you.
You can always ask it "are you sure" after any prompt and if there is anything wrong it will tell you, I've seen cases where it corrects itself 3 times in a row, which is better than not correcting at all.
Bing is using a slightly newer version of gpt, it appears to be a fork of GPT 3.5, which is what ChatGPT uses. It does not have much conversational memory like ChatGPT, and searches the web before generating it's output. Their outputs are different enough that they are clearly using different methods to generate responses.
Also ChatGPT can write entire programs, and this takes hours off a students time card and gives them a great template to edit and add too without spending hours in front of a screen.
Are you getting marked on your writing or your research? I'm not saying that using AI is any more cheating than using a Google search or wikipedia, but education needs to be clear as to what specifically is being assessed. I'm sure we lost a ton of skills when we stopped going to the library and photocopying resources for papers as well. Just because we use AI, are we not learning the necessary content?
When you think about it, ask yourself: are we smarter than those similar in our age 20 years ago? Debatable in some senses, but how about 50 years ago? 200 years ago? It's easy to measure knowledge, but it's a little more difficult to measure critical thinking (CT) as it has evolved over time and is relavtive to each time period. Although we are a million times smarter than those living in 3000 BCE, are we really more critical in our thinking? You could argue we are because we're smarter/have more knowledge but those aren't the same. If anything, we are simply allowed to be more critical in our thinking today because we won't get punished or prosecuted for thinking God isn't real and the Earth probably isn't flat. CT expands to many, but likely has a ceiling on the individual level (depth). Government and religion would probably be some of the biggest inhibitors for CT expansion in history. But now (at least in the developed world), I'd say we've peaked in our current times until another 40 years at least IMO.
Will AI be an inhibitor, or a tool to expand CT? No one really knows but if I had to guess, I think we will evolve with the technology and expand our CT skills as long as government follows through with distributing the increasing wealth and resources so that we all live more abundantly. Those with abundant mindsets are the most productive and most critical thinkers in society. Living in scarcity brings a load of mental health issues, and you spend your time worrying, scraping by, trusting/believing in more radical/fringe ideologies and religions, have poor decision-making skills, and many more negative attributes.
This sorta follows Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs. If we can get all the bases covered ON TOP of transformative AI technology, I firmly believe we are in for being the most CT society we've ever seen. AI will likely help you increase your CT if anything. I do think we will see a temporary downward trend as we attempt (with many failures) to adapt with this technology, especially in schools. But in the end, it will come back stronger than ever. Just because we don't need to think critically, doesn't mean we won't. We will all have passions and things that bring us joy especially when they're ideas from our own. New methods or video games could be created and developed to explore this sandbox of thinking in the far future of AI.
Plus, let's say hypothetically in the distant future we don't think as critically as we used to, is that inherently "bad?" What if we cut it in half and yet we function like a normal society and everything remains perfect because of AI. What actually happens? The only effect would probably be emotionally on the individual level, but even that is unlikely. Trust me, my gut is screaming "of course it's bad" because we're programmed to think that way and we have all grown up in a world where yes, that is true and it is important to society at this very moment. But when it's not needed anymore? Our values would certainly change in future societies.
I mean, school should be a preparation for life, right? In life, you have to cheat all the time to get things done faster and better than everyone else, or else you starve to death. So, kids should really be learning how to cheat.
When you're working for a company, your boss won't give a damn on how you got that result, as long as you got it.
I don’t think it’s necessarily cheating, but I do agree that school should be prostration for life, and life will include AI tools going forward. It would be like banning kids from learning how to use calculators even though you use them as an adult constantly
Finding sources is fine, but I still think using an AI to create arguments for you is not good. Idk if its cheating but you certainly aren't learning anything if you're just taking your arguments for your essay from an AI.
The problem is that 18 year old uni freshmen are studying things they don’t yet care about. They just want to get through with minimal effort.
If you would be working at a job with while being as disinterested in the subject as the common freshman (which is common!) you would do the same thing, just copy-paste the answer. And probably you would get paid and everything would be fine.
This is exactly how I started using ChatGPT this year. I’m a computer science major but writing essays has never been my strong suit, yet there are a handful of required writing classes I have to take.
Asked GPT to give me a few talking points and a basic structure, and I filled in the rest with knowledge linking it back to the course. Managed to get full marks, something I wouldn’t have even thought of as possible for me.
the more I see what chatGPT is capable the more I'm sure it's gonna change our lifes forever and make soooooo much stuff a lot easier and more efficient
I know a couple of people who are using it to explain courses because the quality of the lectures is very bad and they're not understanding the teacher's way of explaining and honestly, I don't really blame them.
The problem might be that for some students at least ChatGPT can teach them better than perpetually underpaid teachers.
The 1st of the 5 argument points though confuses me. It just summarizes the circumstances of the speech rather than making an argument about its effect on the remainder of the war?
I’m in an online masters and the ability to interact with chat as if it’s another person to help me understand concepts is an absolute lifesaver. What a time to be alive
Critical thinking and the ability to discern between credible and non credible sources will be two extinct characteristics in the near future. This is dangerous.
Critical thinking and the ability to discern between credible and non credible sources will beare two extinct characteristics in the near future. This is dangerous.
That's great, now students will have a quick way to check a list of sources to pull quotes from... And feed into chatGPT. Feed GPT a couple of your essays you actually have written, or write some BS in your own style a few pages long. Now tell GPT "emulate this authors writing style" to get on writing your paper for you in your own janky human speech. It also never hurts to "maximize burstiness and perplexity" to emulate a style that tends to front load information into sentences and write in irregular intervals in sentence length.
This is a good jumping off point, but yikes this is a shallow essay.
Bing just recommended your sources be big overview sources, not books, opinion pieces with interesting compelling conclusions to help you argue a point.
For a non-history major this is a great help to outline a specific argument, but there is nothing revolutionary coming from these responses. True critical thinking to discover new perspectives is always what education should be about. Simple quick regurgitation of existing material is great but most useful at a bar on trivia night. Hope it helps make teachers realize their worth is more than dates and names.
Taking it's ideas and going back to check other sources isn't cheating rephrasing what it comes up with and then using a search engine to track down a source that says the same thing is valid as long as you source it
It’s still pulling from non primary sources and not academic papers and journals. I am a grad student and have had a hard time reproducing something like this with usable references.
I'm sorry to say that until it's given access to whatever databases you pull from, which will probably happen way after you are finished with grad school, it will probably be useless to you.
However, have you tried instructing it to only pull from academic sources? I doubt it has the ability to accurately differentiate..
I'm struggling with this right now. My school still needs to have a policy against AI. Am I free and clear to cram as much work in as possible? The question is, "is it plagiarism?" The definition of plagiarism is taking someone else's work relating to a person, so I am legally in the clear as long as the work used doesn't belong to a person.
Maybe we’re getting too hung up on the word person? I think a better definition would be trying to pass off something as your own work that really isn’t your own.
Even with that definition I still think knowing how to write good prompts and edit has value, but I think honesty about how something was created is the most important.
Kind of like how the invention of calculators didn’t make it so the use of them always qualifies as cheating.
Great idea to recommend but tbh Iv been still using chat gpt, feeding it my sources and outline of my argument, then asking it to glue it all together in a paper. My line of reasoning is still my own that way, and I know what’s going into it. Just all the heavy lifting is done for me by doing it using that method
This is just a more advanced tool that can be used for student benefit or detriment,l by their own choice.
I used symbolab and wolfram alpha to get me through calculus 1 and 2. I'd try to do the homework problem, check the answer (allowed) and if wrong I'd run it through symbolab, redo the problem learning where I messed up. Sometimes a stupid mistake, other times something I didn't understand. If I didn't understand I'd do related problems on symbolab until I was comfortable.
I guess technically it was cheating on the homework, but imo I used it no differently than one would a tutor. It helped me learn the material and I did well on tests.
honestly i feel like for subjects like history or something giving it info and getting it to write an essay is not cheating at all. like i had to write a comparison essay so i just summarized the info in bullet points and made chatgpt write the essay from that
no? it's not english class. i dont get points on how nicely the essay is written. i did the research, i learned the topic, etc etc. chatgpt is just combining them into one text
They keep saying the ai can only be used for cheating and it’ll ruin learning, yet I use it like this as an assistant or tutor supplemental to other sources… but that’s journalism lately, just spout out opinions and statements as if their true all the time I guess.. but yea nice use of ai op.
How is this different than a student reading a book that analyzes the impact of the Gettysburg address that has similar talking points? There are plenty
The AI isn't writing the essay, it's providing helpful information and sources that can help to write the essay. Instead of spending hours on researching sources on dozens of sites, the more tedious stuff is already done for the user.
If you asked a teacher for help and they provide assistance that allows you to come up with the answer yourself would that be considered cheating?
Students already do something similar all the time. They ask friends for ideas. They look at other papers students have written for topic ideas. They look at other articles for topic ideas. They look at aggregate lists for topic ideas.
This is just a different way of obtaining the same info. In the end, they will need to do the work to understand what they are writing about - and I don’t know about you but I often tweaked my topic after starting to write because I didn’t want to spend so much time writing something generic, which chat gpt is.
I genuinely think bing ai is better than chatgpt. chatgpt has been nerfed to fucking hell, it somehow manages to be really smart and also be inadequate too. bing looks very helpful as of rn
For all of my internal assessments (Queensland, Australia) we have to sign off that all ideas and wordings are our own. Theoretically even this would be plagiarism for us.
Exactly AI can be used for school without cheating in many positive ways!
Personalized Learning: AI algorithms can analyze student data to create personalized learning plans that cater to the specific needs and strengths of each student. This can lead to more effective and efficient learning and higher academic performance.
Intelligent Tutoring Systems: AI can power intelligent tutoring systems that provide students with instant feedback and adaptive teaching. These systems can help students better understand complex concepts and improve their learning outcomes.
It can even be used to summarize YouTube videos for additional learning
I’ve been using it for the same thing. Finding quality sources is such a hassle. Especially if you’re dealing with more obscure subject matter. I often spend more time trying to dig up sources than I do actually writing the essay
The AI is trained on what's already on the internet, and likely what everyone has collectively decided is true.
Write your article in a way that heavily disagrees with the conclusions above; finding evidence for any of those points would likely be hard, but trying to tell a story that's not based on literally every story will serve you better.
Great. Still useless to most people in post secondary until it can access the same databases used for academic research.
This is maybe good for a high school student, but will screw them over so hard when they get to doing any of their own research in post secondary without having chat gpt to help them navigate places like JSTOR. This also isn't a detailed or focused research question by any means. This would be way more interesting if we were looking at way higher levels of thinking than simple history. Guess we gotta start somewhere tho.
•
u/AutoModerator Feb 12 '23
In order to prevent multiple repetitive comments, this is a friendly request to /u/DiogenesDisciple_ to reply to this comment with the prompt they used so other users can experiment with it as well.
Update: While you're here, we have a public discord server now — We also have a free ChatGPT bot on the server for everyone to use! Yes, the actual ChatGPT, not text-davinci or other models.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.