I suppose that the debate over ChatGPT and its many successors and copycats will rage on forever. My concern goes back to when laptops began to become prevalent in school, what with autocorrect and seemingly unlimited access to plagiarism bait at the literal tips of one's fingers. The real debate is certainly even older than all that. Simply, why are we teaching fewer and fewer students how to write well? I could barely read by the time I reached the 6th grade, but when I graduated from Mudd, I had learned to overcome my literacy deficit and went on to acquire decent writing skills as one of the greatest assets that I ever gained from my undergraduate education. That skill has grown over the decades, and it wasn't through making all these terse Internet posts. I look at kids today and am truly sickened that we continue to manufacture button pushing dummies (my brother's term so very long ago) at such an alarming rate. The last advice I was ever able to give to a high school student who was trying to impress some UC school with his application essays was to put down the laptop, pick up a pad of paper and a pen, and start writing -- then I would help him with what he wrote. I'm currently working on a friend's screenplay and am about to do just that very thing myself.
Thanks Jim. Indeed, the ability to write, and write well is so critical! I think for many of us in STEM fields, it will also be a key differentiating factor that will enable us to leverage our technical skills to make an impact. Thanks for the thoughtful comment.
Thank you, professor. Back to your question regarding ChatGPT, how on earth will the teaching staff at HMC motivate students to not cheat themselves out of this valuable part of their education once the AI service is basically commonplace? It seems to me that this is near the heart of what you were musing about in your original post, STEM notwithstanding.
This is a big question, but one that I think can be addressed well by building relationships and trust with students. Any energy spent toward relationship helps to solidify student buy-in with the learning objectives of a particular course or assignment.
I returned from Japan a few days ago and am still buzzed from jetlag. In spite of that, this issue is still somewhat fresh in my tattered mind, and I do believe that your answer of building relationships and trust with students is a huge key to chaperoning their energies to make good use (the ladder) of the many AI engines which will soon be among us. I wonder if it would be of any use for them at the outset of their Mudd experience, however long that might last, to write one paper in which they analyze your essay (and perhaps any other related writings which would be available at the time) and determine for themselves if they are going to choose the ladder or the crutch. Just a thought in my stunned-by-phaser state.
I agree with your balance of utility and healthy skepticism.
I suppose that the debate over ChatGPT and its many successors and copycats will rage on forever. My concern goes back to when laptops began to become prevalent in school, what with autocorrect and seemingly unlimited access to plagiarism bait at the literal tips of one's fingers. The real debate is certainly even older than all that. Simply, why are we teaching fewer and fewer students how to write well? I could barely read by the time I reached the 6th grade, but when I graduated from Mudd, I had learned to overcome my literacy deficit and went on to acquire decent writing skills as one of the greatest assets that I ever gained from my undergraduate education. That skill has grown over the decades, and it wasn't through making all these terse Internet posts. I look at kids today and am truly sickened that we continue to manufacture button pushing dummies (my brother's term so very long ago) at such an alarming rate. The last advice I was ever able to give to a high school student who was trying to impress some UC school with his application essays was to put down the laptop, pick up a pad of paper and a pen, and start writing -- then I would help him with what he wrote. I'm currently working on a friend's screenplay and am about to do just that very thing myself.
Thanks Jim. Indeed, the ability to write, and write well is so critical! I think for many of us in STEM fields, it will also be a key differentiating factor that will enable us to leverage our technical skills to make an impact. Thanks for the thoughtful comment.
Thank you, professor. Back to your question regarding ChatGPT, how on earth will the teaching staff at HMC motivate students to not cheat themselves out of this valuable part of their education once the AI service is basically commonplace? It seems to me that this is near the heart of what you were musing about in your original post, STEM notwithstanding.
This is a big question, but one that I think can be addressed well by building relationships and trust with students. Any energy spent toward relationship helps to solidify student buy-in with the learning objectives of a particular course or assignment.
I returned from Japan a few days ago and am still buzzed from jetlag. In spite of that, this issue is still somewhat fresh in my tattered mind, and I do believe that your answer of building relationships and trust with students is a huge key to chaperoning their energies to make good use (the ladder) of the many AI engines which will soon be among us. I wonder if it would be of any use for them at the outset of their Mudd experience, however long that might last, to write one paper in which they analyze your essay (and perhaps any other related writings which would be available at the time) and determine for themselves if they are going to choose the ladder or the crutch. Just a thought in my stunned-by-phaser state.