OWNERSHIP

I have been busy teaching over this summer.

One of the things I noticed in terms of real learning is that the student or the learner must take learning seriously for it to take place. With ChatGPT and AI-generated content, students are being spoon-fed with information that is not curated, appropriate, and generalized to mean anything that could be suitable for their own use. The detection is simply a matter of finding if the language is sophisticated, the grammar is flawless, and the text sounds repetitive and when  compared with other submissions, they all sounded the same. It is pathetic that we are producing a bunch of new graduates that relegated thinking to automation.

There are many wonderful things that ChatGPT can do to aid in learning but replacing critical thinking skills is the worst side effect of all. Universities, colleges, and academic institutions must have a company-wide policy as to what the students can't do with AI because it will harm their learning and because it is ubiquitous, it is easy to resort to this device. If students are ignorant as to the sources, limitations, and stupidity of automated content, they can easily use it not knowing that they are selling themselves short and becoming part of the automated herd.

Back in the 80s, learning was traditional and non-modern, but it worked for me. Computers came in the 90s and early 2000s donated from the US but we didn't bother learning more than what was expected. The Internet opened up a lot of doors in the early 2000s for learners but we were still pretty much into books and published materials. I can still recall some of the learning in the classroom during my first Masters when we would discuss issues in the class through the use of argumentation and debate. 

Thinking about this for my daughter gives me concern for her future. As a society, while this technology is nascent and there are still imperfections yet, we should start building an ethical and governance policy for the use of this technology that will ensure the younger generation does not see it as an easy way out and not even an answer to their schooling/academic requirements and obligations. We should regulate the developers to the point that future developments do not create more risks for human consumption in areas where it can subvert or undermine human evolution. Risks assessments should be part and parcel of any policy pertaining to this technology.

We should own this technology and not own us. We should start delineating its boundaries and restricting its use for greater social benefit and not accelerate intellectual societal decay.