Ever since ChatGPT burst onto the scene in November 2022 there have been various people in education citing concerns related to how LLMs such as ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, etc might be misused by students. But to misuse AI, it must therefore be possible to use AI where I feel the sense is that students should be prevented from using, and who decides what is an appropriate or inappropriate use? Those invested in change and evolution, who may understand AI, its benefits and risks, or those invested in retaining the status quo with limited understanding or exercise of using AI, let alone using it in a classroom?
Concerns, concerns and more concerns
Concerns have been raised regarding student plagiarism and cheating where students might use generative AI to complete assignments, tests, or essays, undermining the authenticity of their work and misrepresenting their “true” abilities. This in itself is interesting in ascertaining our “true” abilities. My spelling and grammar needs work but through spelling and grammar checkers it appears better than it is, but given such checkers are so common does this matter when writing an assignment, blog post or other piece of content? And does a piece of written coursework or an exam expose the “true” abilities of students, or is it simply a convenient proxy? Concerns have also been raised in relation to dependency and over-reliance on AI tools which may hinder the development of critical thinking and problem-solving skills if students use them to bypass challenging tasks. But in a world of search engines and suggestion algorithms suggesting our TV, shopping and music habits is this dependency or simply about convenience? Access Disparities and digital divides have also been raised given not all students have equal access to generative AI tools, leading to disparities in academic performance and opportunities. And I suspect this is the most troublesome of the concerns, where the argument regarding the issues some perceive with generative AI may simply fuel an increasing divide between those who can and do use generative AI and those who cant or won’t.
Solution or not?
In relation to assessment some have therefore suggested that the best solution is for simple pen and paper based assessment to be brought back. I am not sure how this would work as students could still use generative AI to create their coursework before simply copying it by hand. It also feels a bit like a “we’ve always done it this way”.
AI detection tools have been suggested however I simply don’t believe these are ever going to be reliable. The key aim for generative AI is to create content which looks like it was created by a human so this will result in a race between AI vendors and the those creating the AI detectors, with only one likely to win that race. And it ain’t the vendors providing the AI detectors (or the schools spending on money on said detectors). Oh and lets not forget the poor students who will be accused of cheating just because their writing style is highly typical and therefore falsely flagged by these so called AI detectors.
But maybe we need to take a step back and ask ourselves what is the purpose of education and of assessment?
What is education about and why assess?
If part of the purpose of education is to provide students with the knowledge, skills and experiences which will allow them to flourish and thrive in the world post compulsory education, then shouldn’t we be looking to provide them with the knowledge, skills and experience in relation to using generative AI? I can only see the use of generative AI increasing across different job types and careers, as I have seen my own use increase post November 2022. As such, to me it is clear that we should be engaging and working with students in relation to the proper and effective use of generative AI.
And what is the purpose of assessment? Is it to test memorisation? And if so, is this as important in a world of search engines and generative AI? Or in the case of coursework, is it to test the students ability to apply knowledge or demonstrate skills? And if this is the case, shouldn’t the students be encouraged to use the tools they have available to them which therefore surely needs to include generative AI? We now, for example, support the use of calculators in Maths exams and we don’t ban the use of spelling and grammar checkers when creating coursework. And if a student with a learning difficulty uses technology to level the playing field through allowing them to type or dictate, why should it be different for a second language speaker of English using AI translation tools, or simply any student using generative AI to help them create better work, to get started, to refine or to seek feedback? Why would we want students to create lesser work than they are capable, when using the tools which are now so widely available to them could allow them to achieve more? Should we not be empowering students to achieve their very best using the tools readily available to them?
Maybe we need to question our current model for assessment, namely tests and coursework, accepting that in a world of generative AI these are no longer suitable or appropriate. Focussing on assessing the outcomes, the product such as coursework, is no longer possible as students will all be able to create similar output using generative AI tools, so instead I would suggest we need to look towards exploring and assessing the processes students undertake.
I also note lots of discussion on teachers using Gen AI to help with the workload challenges, using it to create lesson plans and lesson materials, to help with marking, etc.How is this ok for a teacher but for a student to use the same tools, in largely the same way, it isn’t acceptable?
Time for change, finally?
This does feel like a time where we education, and in particularly assessment, need to change significantly. Gen AI is here to stay, so how can education, how can we make the most of it, preparing our students and providing them with the skills and experiences need to thrive and flourish?
Technology and Learning