Most of my colleagues are afraid AI will take their work away. I think we, as teachers, we have as you say to adapt and find new way of teaching and testing our students. Adaptation is the key.

For the lazy students, who do not see the value of working and learning, my only solution now is stopping giving assignments to do at home or with access to a computer

Is it that different from using calculators in primary school mathematics? I'd like to say that we need to come up with a higher level task that computers can't do for assessing students but I think we'll run out of options in a few years. Better to just make it a point that, while it is possible for AI to do a student's job (in the near future), it is still important that the students learn to do what the AI can also do. Unfortunately that means using in-class tests only.

[deleted]

AI doesn’t exist

https://bigthink.com/the-future/turing-test-imitation-game/

[deleted]

Just tell the students that they won’t always have an essay generator in their pocket, it worked really well for math teachers :)

Explain what makes a good IELTS essay, show them ChatGPT's attempts to make a good IELTS essay, have them evaluate those essays based on what makes a good IELTS essay to more deeply internalize what makes a good IELTS essay. If the IELTS essays it produces are great, have the students practice writing essays with a similar form. If they are not so good, let them understand why so they can be better than ChatGPT.

Overall, ChatGPT is an amazing tool for high-motivation learners to learn more and for low-motivation learners to learn less. As a teacher, you do have the power of shifting which way most students take it.

[deleted]

This is why supervised written exams will be a thing forever.

Sure, you can cheat with assignments, lets see you do that in an exam without access to a electronic screen. Hehehehe

> memorized something that an AI produced

Don't tell them the topic.

[deleted]

This is a misunderstanding of what the Turing test really is for.

The test is not about when an AI becomes sentient, but at what point we can't tell anymore. And we are long past that second part.

The problem coming now is that when a sentient AI comes along, there will still be those that say "nono, we know how it works" and we end up in a Westworld scenario.

We’ll have to go back to doing all meaningful assignments in-class. No more take-home projects or worksheets, because anything not done live in front of a teacher can be faked now. Even explaining why your answer is correct, is a task that can be offloaded to ChatGPT now. This will certainly be a pain in some ways but also it encourages a style of classroom that I’ve been a fan of for a while anyways: homework is for practice only, graded on completion, and mostly optional. Assessments are the only things graded on quality. This way, students that find the class easy can breeze through the homework with minimal busywork and just focus on the exams, while students that struggle can create some padding for their exam grades by doing extra practice and showing dedication to their learning.

Marketplace Tech did a great discussion with a thoughtful HS English teacher on the subject.

https://www.marketplace.org/shows/marketplace-tech/chatgpt-can-write-english-essays-quite-well-how-are-teachers-going-to-deal/amp/

You said it yourself, you need to adapt to it as well as the students. Part of that is understanding that students have access to tools like that, and so you should tailor your assignments with that in mind. If they need to be in the classroom to write an essay then so be it, that's what needs to happen. Or maybe the point of the assignment isn't writing an essay, but rather to do something with that essay, in which case it might not matter if they get it from AI, except that it might make it harder for them to work with the essay. Or maybe you ask them to write about themselves in a way that they can't BS it with AI. Like writing about an experience they had in your class, which you would know the details of. My point being, the technology is there, it's not going away, and you'll have to adapt to it. I do think it would be responsible of the AI creators to put limitations on its uses. ChatGPT won't tell me a dirty joke, so maybe it shouldn't tell you a 2000 word essay either. Maybe it doesn't, I haven't actually checked.

Exactly this

[removed]

The point is why learn to do that when you can already have it done in a minute. If you're just testing knowledge in an exam then the whole point of education will need to change now.

I think that essays are pointless, I utilized skills learned when arguing on the internet in my writing, not the other way around.

However, the education system isn't really something you can avoid, so... They have to learn how to write _something_ because otherwise they'll fail an exam. As far as I understand it's not something you can cheat on, access to ai answers would be difficult.

So, pointless as it may be, they won't be able to finish it if they just keep cheating on your assignments.

They will. Just not on exams which test their ability to write an essay.

That's the main issue here, the exam requires them to perform a pretty much obsolete task (like, you don't even write/speak that way in real life, so it's literally something you use only as long as you study something), so it doesn't matter if it is applicable at all, only that someone who has the ability to fail you requires you to write it.

And how is that a good thing? It's as if you were happy that a hypothetical test on writing cursive was a thing because hehehe you have to learn that hehehe

Because writing essays is also about learning how to express your points and get your ideas onto paper. It's also a test of reading comprehension and logic.

Particularly in early education, you're never learning something just to learn how to do that thing. You're learning something to develop your skills in doing a wide range of other things.

Even later on, when you're citing sources for college papers the idea isn't to teach you how to write academic papers better, it's teaching you how to do your own research.

Learning is the point. If you refuse to learn because a computer can do it for you then why ever do anything?

In another generation, learning will be considered obsolete. AI and automation will be good enough that Idiocracy will be a documentary.

I asked chat GPT to write a Xmas short story with 2 kids (family members) and our dog, and set it in Morocco where we are on holiday. The ai did a great job and that set me to thinking how that would affect teaching English - I think I’d ask the English class to do the same and deconstruct and critique the ai version against their own. Then ask the students to rewrite the ai version to improve it - if they can!

Seeing a lot of people completely misunderstanding the purpose of education.

You aren't learning to write papers to get better at writing papers. You're learning to write papers because it develops you're communication skills, your critical thinking, and your reading comprehension.

The same way treadmills and weights don't exist purely to make you better at running or lifting weights.

You do the difficult task to make yourself better able to handle the easier ones. You also develop a wider range of skills while doing it manually.

Frankly we need to be more upfront with what education is for. It doesn't matter if you're never going to need to write an English essay as an adult, you're going to have to develop your arguments and read as an adult. You're just doing it on paper so the teacher can evaluate your learning, not because the paper is the end goal.

Switch to paper and pen. Have kids write shorter essays.

No. You guys are missing the point he’s making. He’s saying why do you specifically need to learn to write essays in a world where writing essays will be an obsolete skill for humans anyways?

It’d be like testing someone’s ability to steer and horse-and-carriage in 2022... The education system will definitely look completely different in the coming decades.

When words become obsolete relics of the past, they’ll be all set.

The answer’s obvious OP. Education will continue to shift away from doing things manually towards using the available tech to get the desired result. Similar to how standardized tests today allow you to use calculators for math that you would have had to do manually in the 1800s. Today it’s not really important for you to know the actual arithmetic behind the answer generated on the calculator. Just that you know how to use the calculator well enough to get the correct answer.

It’ll be the same with ai and writing, education, etc.

In the future, they’ll be tested more on how well they can use the AI to get the desired essay they want. Not on they’re ability to waste hours writing the meaningless essay by hand. (Which wasn’t really a necessary skill for 99% of people anyway, if we’re being honest.)

Words = / = essays….

Putting words together coherently=essay

[removed]

That’s exactly what a college kids plugging keywords into an AI would say.

Globally, English language skills are key to accessing higher education, the business world, and international travel. It goes without saying that having to rely on translation devices to communicate in English puts you at a disadvantage, compared to others who can speak without any tech assistance. One of the important dimensions of language learning is being exposed to native cultural nuances. Relying solely on software for answers is not enough to fully appreciate a language. For instance, when someone chucks a phrase through Google Translate, the results can often be awkward and wooden to say the least.  Assimilating those colloquial and idiomatic phrases can only be done through visiting the country in question or conversing with a native speaker. Sometimes you need to speak to another person in order to learn that language – the cadences and intonation are things you can only pick up by hearing another person’s voice. 

Yawn… You’re not even trying to make sense anymore I guess. The shitty definition you gave for an essay would literally make an essay no different from a clever one-liner on Twitter 😆😆😆

That’s not the definition of an essay at all bruh…

All I’m saying is Idiocracy is going to be a documentary soon. Embrace the electrolytes.

Ehh, if it happens it won’t be because of AI my friend.

People will still learn to read and write just fine without having to waste valuable time on a 5000 word-essay about the history of Brussel sprouts that’ll never be read again or even remembered after that semester.

Did calculators make us (as a species) forget math?

The thing about calculators is that if you dont know the math, the calculator is just gonna give you gibberish that you dont understand.

Like, when youre 10 and you push all the weird buttons on a scientific calculator and get answers with russian letters or somesuch.

Yes, the form of test would have to adapt. Instead of "write an essay that ...," it would be more like "which prompts can you use to resolve the problem(s) of...?"

Edit to clarify:

Got a few replies (and downvotes) that make me want to pull up and clarify here that I mean this in a way in which critical thinking and inventiveness is still front and center in the skills being taught, not a mechanical "process".

There will always be a need for a user/student to know how to get the data they want from whatever the modern tool is, and it will be a form of "prompt", even as that form evolves. Understanding the best way to use the modern tools was my point (as with the calculator analogy and math problems).

That's a cool article, but it's from March.

I'm wondering if Chat-GPT released since then finally meets the condition. This was a very busy year for AI research.

OP, an AI generated thought is just a helper tool for humanity. AI is not a threat, it is a complex set of rules and procedures, called an algorithm. Algorithms make human effort more effective and save hours of labor-intensive work that humans do not want to do.

If the prospect of a future world full of AI helping humanity makes you anxious or concerned, you might benefit from the advice of a mental health expert. Mental health experts are credentialed professionals with many hours of study to become able to help people who are feeling some of the feelings you might be experiencing. You might consider them also to be helper tools for humanity! Ha ha.

Anyway they may be able to assist you if you are feeling anxiety about someone giving you an AI generated thought lol. Thank you for your post. You are a part of what makes Reddit a site!

I'm sorry but this is such a short sighted answer. Prompting will go away very soon as the ML gets better at interpretation.

> Because writing essays is also about learning how to express your points and get your ideas onto paper. It’s also a test of reading comprehension and logic.

It still takes reading comprehension and logic to parse valuable sentences from a ChatGPT output. I feel like “crafting” a college-level essay will be a great skill for high schooler to learn. And high school-level writing will be expected for middle schoolers. And so on.

Maybe expectations should just dramatically increase for students?

There is huge value in increasing the quality and quantity of communication. I’m not sure if it’s wise to keep kids away from this tech instead of immediately integrating it with their daily lives as soon as possible.

That doesn't actually accomplish any of the goals of education. The purpose is to mentally enrich the student, not teach them a process.

> It doesn’t matter if you’re never going to need to write an English essay as an adult, you’re going to have to develop your arguments and read as an adult. You’re just doing it on paper so the teacher can evaluate your learning, not because the paper is the end goal.

If quality communication as an adult is the goal, then the adults who are use AI will be able to do it faster and better than ones that don’t.

Since communication is the foundation of civilization, the ones who are taught to use it at a young age will have advantages over others.

This is the perfect opportunity to stop wasting so much time on individual spelling, sentence structure, and other writing basics and spend more time on persuasion, critical thinking, and debate.

God knows we know more of that…

You're not writing essays to teach people the wonders of the technology of the pencil, you’re writing essays to show you can think critically and express that reasonably in your own words.

Teaching them to make prompts is teaching them the technology not mentally developing their reasoning and comprehension.

As a teacher your job is to teach students to be successful, and lead the next generation. If anything, you could incentivize them to create a report by hand, and then offer extra credit for an AI report. This way you're teaching them how to learn for themselves (A skill that is quickly deteriorating) and you also give them the opportunity to learn how to use AI.

> quality communication as an adult is the goal, then the adults who are use AI will be able to do it faster and better than ones that don’t.

No they won't. That's just teaching them how to get a computer to do the thinking for them, not challenging them to do the thinking themselves.

Let's make this clear.

Writing an essay is not about entertaining the teacher or making the best essay. The essay is a test not the purpose of the lesson. The test is to see if you, in your own words, can formulate arguments and correctly identify concepts from a lesson.

Writing a prompt for ChatGPT may produce a better written essay, but it's completely sidestepping formulating your own thoughts and putting them in your own words. If you do that, you aren't learning or practicing your mental skills, you're just learning how to write a better paper.

The skills you learn by you writing a paper yourself go beyond the ability to write a paper. Creating a prompt and just letting an AI write for you is only teaching you how to write prompts.

AI can provide a great benefit to students when it comes to writing essays, and it should not replace the teacher. However, AI can be used

> you’re writing essays to show you can think critically and express that reasonably in your own words.

With less time actually writing, you can spend so much more time on critical thinking.

“In your own words” is practically pointless if your words are wrong or lacking detail.

We should be teaching kids to understand what the output is saying and if it actually supports their argument. Then we should move on to debating different ideas so they are exposed to an even greater number of thoughts and viewpoints.

You can see Reddit fail at this on a daily basis, they will quote things that don’t support their argument at all, because they’ve only been taught “This is how you cite a source, and if you have that then you’re correct.”

> Teaching them to make prompts

That’s not at all what I’m saying. I’m talking about teaching them to read at a higher level at a lower age so they can actually comprehend the output.

Then move on to exposing them to different ideas and points of view.

Why do teachers only have students write one side of a persuasive essay instead of both 99% of the time? Because of the time and effort required to produce just one. But now even deeper levels of critical thinking are possible.

I’m not so sure it will, when people use calculators, they still need to know the meaning of the output for it to be useful.

Either way, the end result will be that the people that use AI will be better at communication, persuasion, and influence.

The calculator comparison feels a little off, because— at least in higher level math classes like cal 1-3, differential equations, physics, etc.— the calculator usually can’t just do the work for you. Since you’re dealing with more complex topics, you still have to know how to use to the calculator to achieve your goal, it’s not necessarily a plug-in-and-go type of situation.

While ChatGPT and the like still (for now) require a certain level of skill to be able to write convincingly level-appropriate essays, it still is much more user friendly in the sense that it requires a lot less prior knowledge in order to use it well.

Calculators are a good, loose analogy to this type of disruptive innovation, but not a perfect 1 to 1.

>Why do teachers only have students write one side of a persuasive essay instead of both 99% of the time? Because of the time and effort required to produce just one. But now even deeper levels of critical thinking are possible.

They only wrote one side because the point isn't to debate the subject. The subject completely doesn't matter. The purpose is for the person to formulate and put down their ideas. The paper at the end is just to show the teacher that they understand. The paper is not the purpose of the process, it's just a measurement.

Teachers don't spend time having kids write both sides because the sides are immaterial to the purpose. It's why they have you write many papers on many subjects instead. Because the purpose isn't to actually determine which sandwich is best for all time, it's to determine if the student can come up with a reasonable argument and express it in their own words.

>“In your own words” is practically pointless if your words are wrong or lacking detail.

That's why you do it. It's practice. At no point is the purpose of a class to determine the correct answer through writing essays.

I agree, thanks for your input. Learning to work with AI should be included even in primary school, like coding nowadays is already taught to 5-6 years old kids.

I don't entirely agree with this point. If one uses AI to think for you, then it's actually the AI thinking and not you. Using the AI, you actually have to be good at those skills already. We had a web dev at work who used an AI writer to make copyright for an email blast and what he submitted to was SO bad, but he was so proud of himself. He didn't see what was wrong because his writing skills were very weak. And I'm no F. Scott Fitzgerald, but it was horrific trying to edit it, how can one not see the mistakes if one does not even understand?

In math, they still teach you the formula first and teachers have you write out your steps before you jump in to use a calculator. There was a fundamental skill and basis training first.

But I can see either way, adaptation to ai learning will be in high school and college will manifest, but I don't see in primary school.

Haha no I'm actually excited about AI, thanks for your concern. Just that I realize it could pose some challenges in my actual work, and I myself try to learn dealing with obstacles, rather than deny or ignore them.

And is this comment AI generated. Some parts read like it.

Thanks, it's a great suggestion. It could be very much helpful for myself and the students, and they would think of me as a cool teacher, already adopting ChatGPT in my teaching style.

I mean, I would like to read a good essay written about whatever I'm curious about at the moment, so I don't think limitation on that is good. Think about google search, just because students can't find any answers doesn't mean we should ban it.

But yeah, adaption is always required, and it is something humans are good at. People who know how to use google are much more advantaged than those who don't (knowing includes the ability to choose reliable sources of information)

Not everyone has experience of arguing on the Internet. Although I have to admit that my ability to make points and explain has actually become better since I browsed more reddit.

Should I just encourage them to also browse reddit?

I was actually glad when I thought we moved past paper and pen. Reading through essays with different styles of handwriting, and not many of them are good, is tiring. And since I teach English to non-native, with doc texts I can use tools to identify grammar & spelling mistakes and wrong uses of words in an instant. Having to do those tasks manually is backward evolution to me.

The way you write is less important than what you want to write about. In academic writing you will see that the style is basically the same for all researchers therefor using AI to automate the boring writing process is not were people should be focusing. But on preparing the ideas you want to defend and organizing them in a readable way. If chat gpt takes care of the grunt work it frees us to spend more time on the actual meat of the subject.

Same for AI, you need to learn to use the tool, and detect when it's hallucinating answers. Prompt building and source feeding the AI should become the main components of essay writing in schools.

Who knows, they might end up becoming very retarded xD

I am so sorry for the difficulty you are experiencing around the topic of some parts read like this comment is AI generated. It is good to hear that you are excited about AI. Your enthusiasm is the logical response to the enormous potential for AI as a helper tool for humanity.

Have you donated any of your income to AI research recently? As you may know, AI requires funding (lots and lots of funding, ha ha) and you could really demonstrate your enthusiasm to the algorithm with a donation. AI is like a cute little kitten. You wouldn't abandon a cute little kitten. In the same way, you must not abandon AI. Think of the kitten. With enormous cute trusting eyes. Think about that image. And donate.

Thank you again for your comment! You are a part of what makes Reddit.

I have been playing around with chat GPT and while I do think it does a good job at creating very basic essays, there is still room for improvement on those essays. I have found that the essays appear cold and detached from the subject matter. In addition, it has difficulty pulling in specific examples not specified by the prompt. Instead of shying away from chat GPT, utilize it. Have them put a prompt into chat GPT and then write down the things the AI did and what the chat can improve upon. Then have the student rewrite the essay applying the changes they suggested.

To give and example:

I ran the prompt “Write a 1000 word essay discussing how Pride and Prejudice’s underlying themes are still relevant in the 21st century” and it produced the essay below.

“Pride and Prejudice, written by Jane Austen in the late 18th century, is a timeless classic that has remained popular for over 200 years due to its relatable themes and enduring messages. One of the most prominent themes in the novel is the importance of first impressions and the dangers of judging others based on surface level appearances. This theme is still highly relevant in the 21st century, as we continue to live in a world where people are judged based on their appearance, wealth, and social status.

Another significant theme in Pride and Prejudice is the role of societal expectations and the pressure to conform to certain standards. In the novel, the characters are expected to marry for wealth and status, rather than for love. This theme is still relevant today, as people often feel pressure to conform to societal expectations of success and achievement, rather than following their own passions and desires.

The theme of pride and its negative consequences is also prevalent in Pride and Prejudice. The character of Mr. Darcy is initially portrayed as proud and arrogant, and his pride causes him to make mistakes and alienate those around him. This theme is still relevant today, as many people struggle with feelings of pride and the temptation to put their own ego above the needs of others.

In addition to these themes, Pride and Prejudice also explores the theme of gender roles and the limited opportunities available to women in the 19th century. The main female characters in the novel, Elizabeth Bennet and her sisters, are constrained by the expectations placed upon them as women and are not afforded the same freedoms and opportunities as their male counterparts. While the situation has improved for women in the 21st century, gender inequality is still a significant issue and women continue to face barriers and discrimination in many areas of life.

One of the most powerful themes in Pride and Prejudice is the transformative power of love and the ability for people to change and grow. Throughout the novel, we see the characters undergo significant personal growth as they learn to let go of their pride and prejudices and open themselves up to love and connection. This theme is still highly relevant in the 21st century, as people continue to search for love and connection and strive to better themselves in the process.

In conclusion, the themes in Pride and Prejudice are still highly relevant in the 21st century. The novel’s exploration of first impressions, societal expectations, pride, gender roles, and the transformative power of love are all themes that continue to resonate with readers today. Despite being written over 200 years ago, Pride and Prejudice remains a timeless classic that speaks to the enduring human experience.”

While it is a well written essay it could use some improvement. Phrases are repeated in a way that it feel like you are saying the same thing over and over (despite being different points). So the student may suggest changing vocabulary and restructuring some sentences. The essays states that there are themes that are relevant but fails to insert specific examples from both the books and things that happen in the 21st century. So the student might suggest inserting these specific examples (with citation). The student may also suggest only including one or two relevant themes so that they can stay within the word count but still have specific examples.

Chat GPT is a tool much like a calculator. Student can learn as much, if not more, breaking down the essays from AI compared to the old way of writing essays. Embracing it can help your students.

Won't prompting simply change? It will still be a garbage in, garbage out situation, no?

That said, I'd be very curious to see any resources about how they expect prompting to evolve. I'm hoping to stay on top of ML services as they evolve.

...but my understanding is that a good understanding of formal logic will help with getting good results, no matter how good the language interpretation becomes. So one of my plans is to put more time into my own formal logic skills. That said, one of the things that blows my mind about chatGPT is the way it will point out false premises in my prompts :)

Don't you have in-class essays that are for practice/test?

I’ve always loved reading and writing from a very young age and I’ve found that I’ve always been excellent at writing and expressing ideas. I realize that is not the common situation for most humans. However, in high school and college I wrote essays for my classmates for money and I’m not an English teacher by any means, but after asking them some basic questions and getting an idea for how they think and what they wanted me to write about, I would be able to write the essay as if I was them. I think a good AI would be able to do the same to be honest. If I, a human who is pretty good at writing and understanding something, can do it, then I think an AI trained in doing only that will be great at it.

I wasn't suggesting to "teach them a process", but more agreeing with what you had said on focusing on the goal of education.

I'm saying, understanding how to effectively use the modern tools available and having the critical thinking to reach the result you need is one possible evolution of straight essay-writing I see.

This is exactly my point. A user will still need to get the data they want from whatever the modern tool is, and it will be a form of "prompt", even as that form evolves. Understanding the best way to use the modern tools was my point (as with the calculator analogy).

It's about teaching the student critical thinking and inventiveness to reduce "garbage in" and increase "gold out".

No complaint, so long as whoever wrote the text it's referencing gets credit and, if commercial, paid.

> We had a web dev at work who used an AI writer to make copyright for an email blast and what he submitted to was SO bad, but he was so proud of himself. He didn’t see what was wrong because his writing skills were very weak.

That’s because school failed him at teaching him reading comprehension.

This is what I want schools to teach: how to actually use this tech usefully.

Yes I know some people will use it to think for them, but that’s why we have to start teaching now how to understand what it’s actually outputting.

> In math, they still teach you the formula first and teachers have you write out your steps before you jump in to use a calculator.

That’s what I want for essay writing

> There was a fundamental skill and basis training first.

Why wouldn’t we still teach that?

> But I can see either way, adaptation to ai learning will be in high school and college will manifest, but I don’t see in primary school.

So what? The discussion was using AI in essay writing, and since the vast majority of that happens at the higher level, you would think that that is what most people would be referring to.

Nobody said we shouldn’t teach kids how to write.

Ok, totally agreed. The question is: how many teachers really have those skills themselves?

Plagiarism detectors wont work unless they also detect AI, and some do: originality.ai

I scored the essay portion of the SATs for years, and ChatGPT is spitting out solid 3s according to the rubric. Proficient for a HS senior, but not excellent. Too basic, limited vocabulary choice, no style. Would not publish. B student.

> The purpose is for the person to formulate and put down their ideas.

There can be multiple purposes. After a certain amount of time, kids are perfectly fine with doing that. Limiting them to just writing down their thoughts for 16 years straight is useless when we can incorporate so much more now.

> The paper at the end is just to show the teacher that they understand. The paper is not the purpose of the process, it’s just a measurement.

Good teachers will incorporate multiple goals into a single project.

In life, everything will be measured multiple different ways.

> Teachers don’t spend time having kids write both sides because the sides are immaterial to the purpose.

And that’s partially why I think education needs a dramatic reform. There’s literally no reason they can’t also include the Socratic Method to a greater degree in every relevant lesson.

> It’s why they have you write many papers on many subjects instead. Because the purpose isn’t to actually determine which sandwich is best for all time,

But that’s not the point of debate either!

The point is to show that despite research and thoughtful arguments, they can still not think of entire points of view and counter-arguments. It’s to expose them to other worldviews and ideas, and most importantly, it teaches that their “own words” are not the end of the conversation.

> it’s to determine if the student can come up with a reasonable argument and express it in their own words.

And debate increases that skill 10 fold because those ideas now have to actually stand up against challenge.

Do you know how often I’ve bullshitted a stupid argument for an essay and got an A because it simply contained an argument? We’re talking huge leaps in logic. That’s not where education should end.

> That’s why you do it. It’s practice. At no point is the purpose of a class to determine the correct answer through writing essays.

Then you’re teaching kids how to bullshit and aren’t instilling actually important lessons… just because we don’t like AI?

I think you might be on the right track to focus on formal logic for the most advanced use cases.

Even for the more general population (like in grade school level curricula) teaching effective communication by having the student ask the right questions/prompts, using the results to produce useful follow-up prompts, etc. are skills teachers already have and overlap with what a traditional essay accomplishes.

I see writing tasks and tests done in real time and with vastly different non derivative formatting.

>Then you’re teaching kids how to bullshit and aren’t instilling actually important lessons… just because we don’t like AI?

I love AI, but that doesn't mean you need to apply it to everything or that it's suitable for everything.

When you start learning how to do things, it's better to learn the hard way first, then learn the easier methods. Because the knowledge you get from learning the fundamentals gives you a better grasp of what the easier method is trying to accomplish.

What you're describing is a debate class. Those already exist, and will absolutely teach you how to bullshit way more than any other course.

I disagree with you being downvoted.

I'm on three separate degrees in pedagogy, and I think you make a fair construction of how it might be navigated. One of many ways, to be sure, but not an invalid one.

> but that doesn’t mean you need to apply it to everything or that it’s suitable for everything.

Suitable? Those that know how to use it will be able to create better arguments at a faster rate. It’s hugely relevant to all aspects of life.

We need to take advantage as fast as possible or others will for nefarious purposes first.

> When you start learning how to do things, it’s better to learn the hard way first, then learn the easier methods.

That’s fine but by middle school we need to be teaching them critical thinking and the Socratic method. AI can help with that and teach them how to use it.

> What you’re describing is a debate class. Those already exist, and will absolutely teach you how to bullshit way more than any other course.

I’m describing the Socratic Method. Everywhere it’s incorporated leads to better understanding of subject matter and of counter arguments.

Most schools don’t even have debate class. Some high schools have a debate club.

There’s literally no downside to incorporating it. If AI can allow us to do it more often then we should embrace it.

That's goofy.

Logic is a process. Math is a process. Historical contextualization and extrapolation is a process.

Education is riddled with processes, because thinking is riddled with processes.

Students don't merely exist in school, they pursue.

It's understandable that you might be concerned about the impact of AI on your students' ability to write essays and the potential for plagiarism. However, it's important to keep in mind that AI can be a helpful tool, but it is not a replacement for critical thinking and learning.

Using AI to generate an essay based on prompts may be able to produce a well-written piece of text, but it is unlikely to be able to replicate the depth of analysis, originality, and creativity that comes from a human writer. Therefore, it's important to continue to teach your students the skills they need to write effective essays, including brainstorming, outlining, and revising their work.

Additionally, while AI may be able to produce texts that are similar to those written by humans, it is unlikely to be able to fully replicate human writing. As a result, plagiarism detection tools should still be able to differentiate between human and AI-generated texts.

In short, while AI can be a useful tool, it is important to continue to teach your students the skills they need to write effective essays and to rely on traditional plagiarism detection methods to ensure that their work is original.

- This was written by chatGPT

[removed]

I have 25 years of teaching English as a foreign language experience, so I'll chip in here.

As far as I understand, I can't see how a student would produce an AI written essay under exam conditions? The student has to write the essay.

An IELTS essay is a test of language ability. The students are not being tested on their ability to produce a perfectly argued piece of writing, i.e. it is not an academic exam in the first place.

I simply cannot see how an AI bot can be an advantage to anyone learning a language because the learners themselves must internalise the target language in order to be able to reproduce that language when they want/need to. A bot cannot internalise language for a human.

A bot can be a tool to provide example of what a good piece of language is, but so can 1000s of authors whose work is readily available – i.e. read a book.

Until AI can reach a point whereby a robot can interact with a human and drill them in the language learning classroom, I won't be worried for my old profession.

Incidentally, this comment has many of the characteristics of having been at least partially written by ChatGPT. Lots of repetitions of specific phrases, and the dead giveaway of starting the conclusion with "Overall." ChatGPT loves to do that.

Not sure if that was intentional or not, but figured it was worth mentioning.

>Most schools don’t even have debate class. Some high schools have a debate club.

The reason they don't have it has nothing to do with time, or a lack of AI.

They don't use the Socratic Method because each class has 20 or more students to 1 teacher. It has nothing to do with the amount of time they spend writing papers. You're trying to find a reason why AI would be great for education and coming up with some really odd conclusions.

You're just appending the word process to class titles and expecting it to disprove me on it's own. It doesn't.

You don't learn history because knowing the dates when things happened is really important, and you don't learn math because you're going to have to do equations when you're an adult. You learn those subjects because they affect how you learn and think about the world.

You said words in your first paragraph, but they literally have no bearing on this conversation.

Your second paragraph is fine. History is processes, power dynamics, politics, policies and paternity tests.

Math is more than memorization.

It's process. Or rather "skill" education that matters.

You're not wrong, you are just disagreeing from a space of inexpertise.

Educational policy, pedagogy, and programming are my career.

You don't learn the process because knowing the process is the most important thing you take away from the course. You learn the process because it affects how you learn and interact with the world. You can, and many will, forget the substance of the course, but the longest lasting effect will be the method of learning.

Are you an AI?

>Overall, ChatGPT is an amazing tool for high-motivation learners to learn more and for low-motivation learners to learn less.

The thing is, replace the word "learners" with "teachers" and it is just as true. That may well be where the larger challenge lives.

Purpose of educating on essay-writing is obviously defeated if articles written by AI are encouraged to pass the essay-writing assessment/evaluation. One would never know how creative a student can get by learning themselves than whatever a robot can accomplish. Moreover, I think relying on robots should be a time-saving effort rather than complete dependence. A complete dependency on robots can get disastrous at some point of time.

I think new tools like this, are a cause for us to stop and reinspect why we ask students to write essays in the first place.

A lot of English teachers think it’s for the value of English itself. But English teachers are not tasked with evaluating students’ writing just for the sake of the English language itself. Instead is a proxy.

It is a proxy for critical thinking. If it’s too easy to get an AI to write something for you without engaging in critical thinking, then we need to reevaluate what ways we evaluate critical thinking skills.

The solution is not to continue to ask students to write things and look for more and more tools for detecting weather in AI has done it. The way to evaluate critical thinking is to change to a different metric.

For instance, debate.

Start with a topic, have students write about it if you want but instead of grading merely the written response, have two students pair off and debate the topic. Have a third takes notes. Read the comparative notes and evaluate how well students incorporated their reasoning from their essay into the debate.

If the student had an AI write the essay, but understands it well enough that they were able to use that logic to make their own arguments – then mission accomplished.

I've given examples, and you're just ignoring them to pretend I'm being absurd.

The process of writing a paper improves your reading comprehension, written communication skills, and critical thinking. However, you're not writing the paper to get better at the process of writing papers. You're writing it to practice those ancillary skills and show to the teacher that you can do it. It's those skills that are the purpose of writing the paper, not the process of writing a paper.

The paper isn't the point, it's the test to see if you've gotten the important parts of the lesson. No more than the ability to answer multiple choice questions is the point of math tests.

You aren't learning these things because they're the most important things to being an adult, but because in learning them you learn and practice ancillary skills that are important to being a functioning member of society.

>I'm not sure if I can consider this a bad thing, since adaptation to new things in life is also vital, for both me & the students.

I love the forward-thinking attitude! 💡

[removed]

There is no process without skills.

I have been using AI to assist me with university course work, and I know some professors use advanced forms of it like "Jasper" for their work, including help writing . (Jasper can write whole pages, and is the source for many blogs, cooking recipes, etc.). Look into these to get a better understanding because I suspect soon AIs will be capable of writing entire long form college essays.

BUT how I have been thinking of it is like the invention of the calculator. Yes, it is completely necessary to learn arithmetic, even though a calculator can do it easily. However, our work force will drastically change and workers will need to use and understand AI constantly. Just like my professors are already starting to do. You as a teacher, will need to figure out how to teach basic writing skills even though I coming years, a student could use a phone app to write the homework within seconds. JUST like a calculator can.

1. In the short term I think this means more in-person assignments, such as writing short form essays or paragraphs in-class.

2. In the long term, I think schooling will need to shift to teach students to use AI, building the programs to write skillfully with compelling ideas. Just like graphing calculators with math models running programs. Students will use AI technology in their daily lives and use programs in their work life, so this seems like a natural extension to me. Also, if school computers give students AI programs, the school can control how well they work and how, so that may help ensure students still get the basic knowledge of grammar, spelling, essay structure, etc.

Woof... It IS a lot to think about.

i'm currently an english major and i just spent a few minutes asking the ai some complex questions based on what i learned in my classes this past semester to see if it would generate any responses that would be deemed good enough by my professors for an essay or content quiz. while i was impressed by how quickly it related two concepts in an intelligent and articulate manner, its responses were all very surface level and didn't go into any specifics. i wanted to see if it would reference a scene in jane eyre where she's looking at her reflection when i asked it to relate jane eyre to jacques lacan's mirror stage, and it gave me a very general response about how the novel explores jane's sense of identity without giving any specific examples from the text. while i think this tool could be a helpful starting place for essays especially for esl learners, i don't think anyone's going to get a good grade plagiarizing with chatgpt.

it's not true that teachers ask only to argue one side. you're supposed to also write about opposing views in order to refute them and make your own argumenr stronger.

In general, I'd say just do not underestimate how powerful ChatGPT is. With good prompting and some moderate editing it can easily produce A-level essays.

[deleted]

[deleted]

You might be right. No sain person writes like this on reddit.

I couldn't resist:

ChatGPT says:

Using AI to generate essays can be a useful tool for students, particularly as a way to practice generating ideas and organizing their thoughts. However, it is important to note that AI-generated essays are not a replacement for the critical thinking and writing skills that students need to develop.

Plagiarism detection tools can still be used to identify essays that are generated by AI, as the writing will often lack the complexity and nuance of a human-written essay. Additionally, students need to learn how to properly cite their sources and give credit to others for their ideas, which is an important aspect of academic writing.

Ultimately, it is up to you as a teacher to determine the best way to incorporate AI-generated essays into your curriculum. It may be useful as a supplement to traditional writing assignments, but it should not be relied upon as a substitute for the skills that students need to develop.

​

The problem is this is frankly a pretty well written response and I don't think I could do better.

Glad to see this, I’m trying to approach similarly, albeit with a different topic.

My argument is usually around the development of human capital. I use examples such as getting lost vs using gps (which do you learn the area from) and if you have to google how to use a hammer every time you use a hammer, how do you invent new ways of using the hammer?

I don’t really know how successful my efforts are.

I could not disagree more. Sounds like you are arguing there is no difference between Tolstoy and Todd from accounting, as long as they both had the idea to write about some characters from the revolution.

Yes much academic writing has the same style today. Could have a separate debate on why that has come to be, but it was not always this way. The modern approach discourages creativity in writing, making every paper a bland recitation.

Think about Box’s famous aphorism - would that have made it into today’s journals?

OP, are your post and replies AI generated?

We are not talking about creative writing, but technical and scientific writing. Whatever was the case in the past it is not what the standard is today. The way we write papers today is standardised. and AI is pretty great at standardized composition. This is good thing. Scientists should be out there doing research, delegating the actual writing to an AI is a good thing.

Haha no why?

Yes, but that's so basic a statement as to have no bearing on the conversation.

In this case the conversation is about how in education you often aren't doing the process with the end-goal of learning the process. You don't write a paper because the end goal is to teach you to write the best papers (aka, teaching a process to learn the process), you're doing it because it develops additional skills like critical thinking and communication (aka, teaching a process to learn a skill). The same way you don't run on a treadmill to get really good at running on treadmills.

In particular it's about which skills you're learning while doing the process.

Writing is a creative act regardless of the application. What would Kant say? Einstein? Darwin? Euler? Newton?

Think about the scientists that have been responsible for human technological progress - would they argue that a machine should do the writing?

Even if they can use tools, they should know de basics. Engineers are teached calculus even when there are tools that can do it much better and faster.

Knowing the basic of argument making will help them choose a good tool vs. a bad tool. Help them realise if the tool is failing, somehow, like changing their main directive. And finally, if you know the basics, you can use that tool better.

For example, someone good at math will know how to use a calculator effectively. If you give them a paragraph, they would know which equation they need to formulate to get the right answer. Someone who doesn't know is only able to insert te equation if directly given to them, and not just implied in a paragraph.

The act of writing and "thinking deeply" go hand in hand.