“ChatGPT is a language model created by OpenAI, designed to answer a wide range of questions on a variety of topics. It has been trained on a vast corpus of text data and is capable of generating natural language responses to a wide range of queries.”(Response from ChatGPT about what it is).
Gerak has
watched with interest and some fascination the introduction of ChatGPT by
OpenAI.
Equally
fascinating are the responses to the innovation ranging from doomsday
pronouncements to unbridled enthusiasm that see the innovation as a game
changer in many fields of human endeavour. Particularly noteworthy are the
reactions from higher education institutions and educators.
Here, too,
the responses range from the extreme to the curious and from the positive to
the negative.
The doomsday
criers see in the innovation the beginning of the end of universities. Educators
are concerned that it will undermine academic integrity, encourage academic
cheating in the form of plagiarism and promote laziness in students and even
teachers.
Less
strident opponents are concerned with students becoming over reliant on
technology leading to diminished critical thinking and problem-solving skills.
There is also concern that students learning in isolation from others will have
negative implications on the social aspects of learning which are vital for the
overall development of students in higher education.
GERAK shares
many of these concerns. We fear that relying too heavily on a single source of
knowledge, however large the dataset exposes students and academics to
incomplete, inaccurate, biased and misleading information.
The ChatGPT
demo model that is available to anyone responds quickly to most questions, but
the answers are, for the moment, synthetic and robotic. They lack the conviction
of the texts one reads in books.
Also, when
asked to carry out more subtle language tasks like evaluating poetry or writing
it, ChatGPT’s limitations are stark.
Nonetheless,
it is able to explain its limitations (‘I am a large language model trained
by OpenAI and I don’t have the ability to evaluate the quality of literary
works or make aesthetic judgments.’) making it sound like a contrite
student caught cheating. Its efficiencies will however certainly improve over
the years with larger datasets and improved AI. Indeed, we see the technology
becoming pervasive, not only in higher education but in other areas human
endeavour.
We can add a
whole host of concerns and limitations about the innovation. Suffice for now
that the ethical and deep educational issues will not go away. Of even greater
concern is how AI based tools will dominate knowledge production and lead
students and scholars to rely only on AI sources to tap into knowledge. There
is a real risk of knowledge domination flowing from such contraptions that
threaten to make us the victims of knowledge and not its creators. Higher
education must find ways to deal with these.
There is
therefore an urgent need for a government high-level task force or committee of
experts from education and technology to understand the technology and develop
cross-sector policies and guidelines to meet the potential and challenges of
the technology. This is essential in light of the Guidance issued by UNESCO on
AI and education and the initiatives taken by Australia and the US to address
this.
The Minister
of Higher Education in his resolutions for the higher education sector has
foreshadowed the development of a White Paper on technology, "A New
Horizon for Science, Technology, and Innovation. A Strategy for Malaysia".
GERAK
believes that the scope of that initiative can be expanded to include
innovations like ChatGPT or, better still, to develop a separate paper that
will focus only on Artificial Intelligence generated tools.
No comments:
Post a Comment
I would love to hear your comments.