Digital Pedagogy: Towards a Policy for ChatGPT (v2)
A. Kayode Adesemowo
Chartered Engineer, Information Assurance Advisor, Project Manager, Educational Technologist, Researcher, Trainer
A policy thought on conversational AI (ChatGPT) by A. Kayode Adesemowo - https://lnkd.in/dZsxz6aH
09 Jan 2023, my brother from another mother, Afikile Sikwebu was having a conversation with me around the (high school) subject Digital Technology (Grade 8 and 9 in South Africa). During the brief session, ChatGPT sprouts up. Inevitably, concern about the #capability of #chatgpt (Susnjak, 2022) was raised, and it is that students should learn.
Intuitively, I made mentioned two things.
Below, I'll expand a bit on these two as they inform my viewpoint on a possible policy or code of good practice approach to leveraging #chatgpt in learning, especially in a subject that is termed 'digital technology'!
Albert Einstein — “Education is not the learning of facts, but the training of the mind to think.” (abridged)
Albert Einstein 1921 — ' “It is not so very important for a person to learn facts. For that he does not really need a college. He can learn them from books. The value of an education in a liberal arts college is not the learning of many facts, but the training of the mind to think something that cannot be learned from textbooks.” | Einstein's 1921 response to Thomas Edison's (in Philipp Frank: "Einstein: His Life and Times")
Conversational AI (chatbot)
Conversational artificial intelligence (AI) chatbots are a form of AI having roots in natural language processing (NLP), and machine learning (ML). Their peculiar characteristic is their conversational ability/capability in near-human nature. They utilise NLP and learn from users based on machine/deep/active learning to constantly evolve to fit its context Gkinko and Elbanna, 2023).
Around 30 November 2022, with the 'launch' of ChatGPT, conversational AI took a ubiquity turn towards availability and 'seamless' use by 'everyone' (Kurian et al., 2023). Use-case of conversational AI typically engage users such as consumers, and staff within 'ringfenced' domains (Saka et al., 2023, Gkinko and Elbanna, 2023). ChatGPT brings it to the public. While not error-free, the versatility of conversational AI comes to the fore with #chatgpt passing a US law school course (Choi et al., 2023).
With the advent of robust 'ready-to-use' conversational AI like #chatgpt (now heavily funded by the likes of Microsoft) and 'triggering' about-to-launch #bard by Google, the landscape is just about to become the new normal in sustainable assessment (Adesemowo et al., 2017), teaching and learning (Kivunja, 2014; Susnjak, 2022). We owe a duty to prepare the students for the future workforce citizenry.
CHATGPT: Two dimensions of learning and assessment
One of the hallmarks of learning, at least in the domain of (connectivism inclined) digital pedagogy, is bringing critical mind and reflection. The internet has grown tremendously, enabling users, especially students, to get programming code studs. It only gets #real with chatgpt. However, from a learning and teaching viewpoint, chatgpt is but just a #tool! In (Goerge Siemens') connectivism pedagogy (Kivunja, 2014), tools are encouraged. What sets the students apart in their learning is the critical engagement and application of their own.
I recalled back around 2002 or 2003, I was auditing a course (723: Advanced Computer Networks - C language). Audit because my Masters was research-based with no taught component. The lecturer, also my supervisor, Bill Tucker . There were #3 components to the assessment. Bill will write his 'driver' to test the functionality of your code. Secondly, your submitted code file must be well commented on: introduction/summary, line comment, and function comment. If I recall well, even with well-functional code, without comments, you stand a chance of getting a maximum of about 55%. The last part is your presentation explaining your project in your own words.
Flip forward more than a decade after, I got entrenched in sustainable assessment (Adesemowo et al., 2017). My students 'construction' and explanation were more important than just what they 'claimed' to submit. Well, I wasn't a #popular lecturer for my approach: suffice to say, some have come to thank me years after leaving varsity.
In my view, proper contextual code commenting, and functionality explanation must be mandated.
The second-dimensional aspect is the #groundtruth of students' submitted work (in this instance, code). I dare proffer that students must be mandated to include, as an appendix, their conversational AI (#chatgpt, #bard) results. In essence, they are free to use conversational AI tools/processes/systems (like #chatgpt, #bard), however, their submission is not the #chatgpt, #bard.
This means students must still produce a submission based on their own words, thoughts and critical mind. In so doing, they make reference to what conversational AI (#chatgpt, #bard) gave them (in their appendix) and show their critical and cognitive skills in their write-up.
As stated by Susnjak (2022), "[I]t is crucial for educators and institutions to be aware of the possibility of human-like conversational AI (ChatGPT, Bard) being used for cheating and to investigate measures to address it in order to maintain the fairness and validity of online exams for all students." {italic edited by author}. Already, OpenAI is on board with #AIClassifier, their 'elixir' that helps identify 'AI' generated' text! See the E&T article.
Recommended by LinkedIn
Policy Statement
Learning goes beyond simply regurgitating a teacher's statements or notes or the content of a textbook. Students must bring their critical and creative minds to bear.
The emergence of #chatgpt in 2022 brings with it a long-facing dilemma of 'authenticating' the veracity of a student's work. With #chatgpt, authenticity gets profounded.
ChatGPT is a trained natural language processing (NLP) model, capable of generating human-like text in a conversational style (https://lablab.ai/tech/chatgpt). The generated text spans from short answers, essays, and blueprints to (computer) codes.
In line with the purports of digital technologies in the fourth/fifth industrial revolution and digital transformation, #students are allowed to and encouraged to use chatgpt in their learning process. They must, however, fully disclose and reference their ChatGPT process and results in a transparent way. Failure to do so shall result in facing investigation and disciplinary for academic dishonesty and dishonest act in general.
Subject heads shall develop guidelines or Code of Good Practice based on this policy statement. In developing guidelines, they shall be guided by the concept of sustainable assessment, teaching and learning. As the AI-enabled bot technology unfolds, the policy, guidelines, and CoGP shall evolve accordingly; however, they shall not be dictated by the semantics of each AI-enabled bot.
[v2: updated 13 Feb 2023] - # @adesemmyk
[Linkedin posts]
[v2 Crosspost on Medium]
References:
Adesemowo, A. K., Oyedele, Y., & Oyedele, O. (2017). Text-based sustainable assessment: A case of first-year information and communication technology networking students. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 55, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2017.04.005
Adesemowo, A. K., & Gerber, M. (2014). E-skilling on fundamental ICT networking concepts – Overcoming the resource constraints at a South African university. In E. Cohen (Ed.), Proceedings of the e-Skills for Knowledge Production and Innovation Conference 2014 (pp. 1–16). Informing Science Institute.
Choi, J. H., Hickman, K. E., Monahan, A., & Schwarcz, D. (2023). ChatGPT Goes to Law School. Available at SSRN. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4335905
DBE: Department of Basic Education. (n.d.). CAPS: Digital Technology—Technical Occupational Grade 8 and 9. CAPS Digital Technology. Retrieved January 9, 2023, from https://www.education.gov.za/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=dx1_Dj3M5kE%3D&tabid=2656&portalid=0&mid=9311
Gkinko, L., & Elbanna, A. (2023). Designing trust: The formation of employees’ trust in conversational AI in the digital workplace. Journal of Business Research, 158, 113707. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2023.113707
Kivunja, C. (2014). Do You Want Your Students to Be Job-Ready with 21st Century Skills? Change Pedagogies: A Pedagogical Paradigm Shift from Vygotskyian Social Constructivism to Critical Thinking, Problem Solving and Siemens’ Digital Connectivism. International Journal of Higher Education, 3(3), 81–91. https://doi.org/10.5430/ijhe.v3n3p81
Kurian, N., Cherian, J. M., Sudharson, N. A., Varghese, K. G., & Wadhwa, S. (2023). AI is now everywhere. British Dental Journal, 234(2), 72-72. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41415-023-5461-1
Saka, A. B., Oyedele, L. O., Akanbi, L. A., Ganiyu, S. A., Chan, D. W., & Bello, S. A. (2023). Conversational artificial intelligence in the AEC industry: A review of present status, challenges and opportunities. Advanced Engineering Informatics, 55, 101869. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aei.2022.101869
Susnjak, T. (2022). ChatGPT: The End of Online Exam Integrity? (arXiv:2212.09292). arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2212.09292