Adventures in Technology Enhanced Learning @ UoP

Tag: ChatGPT

Guest Blogger: Tom Langston – How ChatGPT Revolutionized My Writing Process – The AI version

(Co-writer: ChatGPT)

This version was generated after feeding in my attempt at writing this blog post and asking ChatGPT to ‘shorten this text into a blog post’.

I recently discovered the incredible potential of ChatGPT, and it completely revolutionized the way I approached my writing. As a student pursuing a Professional Doctorate in Education, I often struggled with crafting cohesive and focused assignments. My writing style was scattered and verbose, making it difficult for readers to follow my train of thought. Enter ChatGPT, a powerful AI language model that became my secret weapon in developing a well-structured research proposal.

Initially, I sought human help from my project supervisor, Stephen Webb, who pointed out that my writing relied too heavily on vague terms like “this” and “it.” While I understood the meaning behind my words, Stephen reminded me that readers might not share the same clarity. Armed with his feedback, I set out to improve my proposal.

When I completed the next draft, I thought I was finished. However, the word count was far too high, so I turned to ChatGPT for assistance in condensing my writing. It did the job, but the result lacked my personal touch and voice as a writer. I realized I would have to manually trim down the content to achieve the desired outcome.

During this editing process, I discovered the true power of ChatGPT. I started using it to check sentences that I struggled to articulate clearly. When I asked for grammar assistance, ChatGPT not only provided corrections but also suggested ways to enhance sentence structure and improve readability. This iterative process allowed me to refine my writing, discarding extraneous thoughts and rearranging sentences for better flow. It became evident that if a particular text no longer fit within the new leaner version, despite my attachment to it, it had to be eliminated. This experience epitomized the essence of editing.

As I continued to utilize ChatGPT, I encountered questions of ethics. While it proved immensely useful in reducing my word count, I couldn’t help but feel uneasy about presenting the AI-generated content as my own. The ethical implications of using AI in writing remain a divisive topic, with differing perspectives on its appropriateness and boundaries. To navigate this issue, some suggest referencing AI tools in an appendix, detailing their specific use and purpose in the writing process. However, this raises questions about the extent to which we should acknowledge AI contributions and how that compares to other forms of assistance, such as spell checkers or language tools like Grammarly.

One important consideration is whether AI tools are always correct. While they excel at constructing language, they may strip away the author’s voice and inadvertently introduce errors. In my experience, Grammarly sometimes made corrections to the text generated by ChatGPT, highlighting the need for human judgment in refining the output.

In conclusion, ChatGPT became a game-changer for me, transforming my writing process in ways I had never imagined. I believe it should be embraced as a valuable resource for students to tighten their drafts before seeking extensive academic support. By incorporating AI tools, we can alleviate the burden on educators, who can then focus on reviewing more polished submissions requiring minimal intervention. However, it is crucial to strike a balance and ensure that AI enhances our own voices rather than overshadowing them. AI is undoubtedly here to stay, and by harnessing its power thoughtfully, we can elevate our writing while preserving our unique identities as authors.

Thoughts from the Proofreader:

I was asked to proofread Tom’s blog post here and have a look at ChatGPT’s version too. Comparing the two, I definitely found Tom’s writing much more personable – I could imagine him speaking as I read through it. ChatGPT’s version presented the information efficiently and effectively, and I found nothing to correct. However, in its response to the prompt, it had taken away everything that made Tom sound like Tom!

This experience also really made me realise how many misconceptions I have about AI tools. I’d assumed that ChatGPT would have a very grammatical approach to its interpretation of language – rather like I’ve been told I have! However, when Tom asked it about the difference between ‘that allowed’ and ‘allowing’, ChatGPT talked with authority about implications and potential meanings. This answer was a long way from my interpretation, which attributed the difference to the grammar of relative clauses (X refers to one thing, Y refers to another). As Tom demonstrated with his irony example, it’s worth being cautious with how far we trust its responses. And I think we can be confident that human input will still be needed for a few years (or at least months) yet. 

Credit Image: Photo by Bram Naus on Unsplash

Guest Blogger: Tom Langston – Last Night ChatGPT Saved My Life…

The classic line from Indeep’s 1982 post-disco hit “Last Night a DJ Saved My Life” serves as the basis of my title. As ChatGPT did – not literally, but figuratively – save my life.

I am currently studying for the university’s Professional Doctorate in Education and, since February, have been completing my final taught assignment entitled “Research Proposal”.

It takes me a while to write, as I don’t find it easy, and I am not that good at it. My approach to writing is best described as little and often, frequently getting distracted and losing focus on the task at hand. If you have ever seen Dave Gorman’s “Googlewhack Adventure”, you will understand my problem: his book and stage show outlined how he was meant to write a fictional novel and ended up writing and performing about his experiences of Googlewhacks (Googlewhacking?) instead. He got distracted by less important but much more fun endeavours. 

The other problem is that I don’t get to the point. I write a verbose mess of unconnected thoughts. So with that in mind, I am going to explain how the rise of the machines (we are not far away from ChatGPT working out it wants to be Skynet) assisted me in writing my “research proposal” assignment. 

First Drafts

To start with, I had human help. Stephen Webb, as my project supervisor, read a draft I had written. He demonstrated that a lot of my writing relied on small words to, as he put it “do the heavy lifting”. Using ‘this…’ and ‘it…’ frequently because I understood what I was trying to say –  he pointed out that the reader might not. The only reason he could even start to understand my work was because he knew me and the context of my subject. 

From his extensive feedback, I redrafted, edited and tried to improve my proposal. 

After completing the next draft, I thought I’m done. However, I was well over the word count, so I put sections into ChatGPT and told it to re-write it within my word limit. It only bloomin’ did it! The problem was it was very sterile; it lost all sense of who I am as a writer. This meant I was going to have to manually get the word count down. 

After another version, I asked Stephen for some clarification on some of his earlier feedback. His reply was:

“In the section you sent through, there are still individual sentences that are hard to parse. The initial word of a sentence or clause primes the reader to think in a certain way; if the sentence or clause doesn’t deliver, then confusion arises. You really should pass this through a grammar checker, Tom.”

Not being a confident writer, I already knew that my writing needed work. What this feedback demonstrated to me was that I lacked cohesion and structure. My train of thought constantly jumping around the entire document is a by-product, I guess, of writing in such short unfocussed bursts. 

I wrote a heading titled “Introduction” but did not actually introduce anything. As Stephen had pointed out, I had poorly communicated my narrative. What this meant was that readers were getting lost in my disconnected thoughts. I could now see that certain sections felt shoe-horned in because I liked what I had written. Realistically, those “gems” made no sense to the reader as they were not connected with the text surrounding them. 

I tried to use ChatGPT to see if it could make sense of it, but there was too much there for it to tell me how to rearrange it. The system did not accept the entirety of the text and could not provide clarity to the sections I had written. ChatGPT could not offer clear guidance for how best to rework and rearrange it.

A Quick Aside

At this point, on re-reading the above section, I think it nicely illustrates the problem I was talking about. I have said the same thing here in three different ways. 

  1. I tried to use ChatGPT to see if it could make sense of it, but there was too much there for it to tell me how to rearrange it. 
  2. The system did not accept the entirety of the text and could not provide clarity to the sections I had written. 
  3. ChatGPT could not offer clear guidance for how best to rework and rearrange it.

I only need to use one. In the past, Stephen had raised this issue with me, but it is a hard thing to change. What I am going to discuss next is my recent experiences of using ChatGPT as a tool to develop the parts in my writing I would not have picked up on myself. Heck, as I go back through this blog, I’m sure I’ll find more. I just won’t mention anything I’ve changed, so you’ll never know… 

Editing with ChatGPT

As I worked my way through the editing process, I started to use ChatGPT to check sentences I wanted to keep but was struggling to make coherent. They were either too long, or the idea I was trying to convey was not coming through clearly enough. 

An example of this would be when I asked ChatGPT to “check the grammar”:

My original question:

My situation should be made clear to the participants, allowing them to have fully informed consent, but to also highlight that if they perceive issues in the current hybrid environments I am hoping to act on their concerns and not silence their voices.

ChatGPTs reply:

The grammar of the provided text is correct. However, there are a few suggestions for improving clarity and readability:

“My situation should be made clear to the participants, enabling them to provide fully informed consent. Moreover, it is important to emphasise that if they perceive any issues in the current hybrid environments, I am committed to addressing their concerns and not silencing their voices.”

In this revised version, I made a few adjustments to enhance the sentence structure and clarify the message.

It was this repeated process that helped me (despite, at times, slowing me down) as I kept re-reading the submission each time, trying to tighten up my writing. Finding new thoughts that were slightly out and attempting to move them to the correct place. It became a good rule of thumb that, if the text I wrote did not fit in the new, leaner version, despite how much I wanted to keep it, it was gone. (Well done Tom – you just discovered the true meaning of editing!)

Below is an example of how I started to use ChatGPT to my advantage so I could improve my writing. 

My question to ChatGPT:

Should it be “that allowed” or “allowing” in the following text – 

Before the pandemic only the most confident teaching staff employed interactive tools (Nearpod, Mentimeter, etc.) within a lecture space that allowed students the ability to creatively engage with the material (Tan et al., 2020).

ChatGPTs reply:

Both “that allowed” and “allowing” are grammatically correct in the given sentence. However, the choice between them depends on the intended meaning and emphasis.

“That allowed”

Using “that allowed” suggests that the interactive tools were specifically designed or configured in a way that granted students the ability to creatively engage with the material. It implies that the tools had a built-in functionality or feature enabling such engagement.

“Allowing”

Using “allowing” suggests that the interactive tools, in a general sense, provided the opportunity or capability for students to creatively engage with the material. It implies that the tools had the potential or capacity to facilitate such engagement.

Both options are valid, but if you want to emphasize that the interactive tools had a specific functionality designed to enable creative engagement, “that allowed” would be more suitable. If you want to convey a more general sense of opportunity or capability, “allowing” would be a better choice.

As you can see, ChatGPT helped to explain how the slight difference in the sentence structure changed the meaning of what I was writing. I was able to consider what it was I’m trying to say and use the most appropriate version. 

Through all my previous doctoral assignments, I had a different tutor who helped me with my drafts. They told me they liked my writing style, which gave me the impression I was good at it. I can’t say what they specifically liked about my writing. I can make an educated guess that, because it was a level 8 assessment, my mistakes were forgiven. The marker was able to interpret the little words “that are doing the heavy lifting” (as Stephen had pointed out) more easily than your ‘average’ reader. Stephen helped me understand that it is one thing to have an interesting voice running through your text but is quite something else to actually be good at writing. 

The ethics of using AI

When I got ChatGPT to reduce my word count, I spoke with Stephen about the ethics of it and (ignoring the sanitisation of the output) it felt like a great way for a writer to do this. However, it felt wrong to take what ChatGPT had created as my own.

There is going to be an ethical divide between those who see using any form of AI as wrong and those who see it as a tool for improvement. The problem (as always) lies in the grey area and the boundaries of where people choose to deploy it, for example how far the tool is shaping their work beyond what would have been possible by them alone. While knowing it might be unethical, some will use it due to other commitments (work, family, etc). This scenario is a foreseeable eventuality, much like those who copied other work or paid essay mills for their work. But perhaps AI may feel slightly more ethical? As I am about to discuss, maybe a strong referencing code is what is required. But people (I was going to put students, but felt that unfair as we all have a personal line we move and adjust depending on the subject) will always push and flex the boundaries of fairness.

Referencing AI

In a recent ALT mailing list post, the question was asked about referencing when AI was used to  support work. The reply pointed to Boston University’s faculty of computing and data science guidance “Using generative AI in coursework”. The post highlighted this text:

“When using AI tools on assignments, add an appendix showing

(a) the entire exchange, highlighting the most relevant sections;

(b) a description of precisely which AI tools were used (e.g. ChatGPT private subscription version or DALL-E free version),

(c) an explanation of how the AI tools were used (e.g. to generate ideas, turns of phrase, elements of text, long stretches of text, lines of argument, pieces of evidence, maps of conceptual territory, illustrations of key concepts, etc.);

(d) an account of why AI tools were used (e.g. to save time, to surmount writer’s block, to stimulate thinking, to handle mounting stress, to clarify prose, to translate text, to experiment for fun, etc.).”

This almost feels as if there are too many barriers to use for a subject (or level) where you may be writing assignments of 6000+ words. Especially if you have to reference every section of text AI helped with. The follow-up question is then do you have to highlight every time spellcheck made a correction? Do you have to disclose that you used a service like Grammarly to make minor amendments? That is of course hyperbole. I think that if you get AI to generate starting paragraphs or change substantial amounts of your work, yes, this should be explained in an appendix. For re-writing a sentence and making grammatical choices, then no. That raises another question, how many sentences constitute a substantive change? 

Are AI tools always correct?

The final point relates to whether they are always correct. Now I know these tools are better than me at the construction of language. I have always been better at face-to-face conversations as a form of communication. During a conversation I can see when people don’t understand me, so adapt how and what I say accordingly. Writing does not afford the writer or reader the same luxury. So why do I ask if they are correct? As I have already mentioned, ChatGPT sterilised my voice. When asked to reduce the word count, it did what it was supposed to do but it strips out the humanity of the author (unsurprising being that it is a computer).

Another example (inside a paragraph that starts “The final point”, I do get the irony) is that Grammarly made corrections to the generated text from ChatGPT. 

This is a screenshot of a reply from ChatGPT placed within a box saying 'Both "that allowed" and "allowing" are grammatically correct in the given sentence. This box appears on the lefthand side of the screen on the righthand side is a box created by Grammarly. Grammarly has written Formality, then says to engage with the material creatively. The to-infinitive to engage has been split by the modifier creatively. Avoiding split infinitives can help your writing sounds more formal.
Another “another example” of a final point is: I put the above paragraph into ChatGPT to ask if I had used irony correctly. This is what it said:

Yes, the use of the word “irony” in this context is correct. Irony is a literary device that involves a contrast between expectations and reality. In your statement, you are highlighting the irony in two situations:

The first example of irony is that despite recognizing that language generation tools like ChatGPT are better than you at constructing language, you also acknowledge that you excel at face-to-face conversations where you can adapt and clarify your communication based on people’s reactions. The irony lies in the contrast between the effectiveness of these tools in writing and your personal strength in face-to-face communication.

The second example of irony is that Grammarly, a tool designed to enhance writing and make corrections, ends up making corrections to the text generated by ChatGPT. Here, the irony arises from the fact that a tool meant to improve the quality of the text is itself making changes to the output of another tool that is supposed to assist in generating text.

Overall, both examples demonstrate a contrast between expectations and reality, highlighting the ironic situations in your statement.

The system had not understood how I had used irony in the sentence but said that the overarching point I was making was ironic.

This image is of a person standing, with their eyes focusing as if they're looking at someone else who might be sitting down, because their chin is tilted down a little. The wording across the top of the image reads: I am still none the wiser if I used irony correctly in the parenthesis when I keep adding examples to a final point. The wording along the bottom of the image reads: And at this point I'm too afraid to ask.

Conclusion

In conclusion, ChatGPT ‘saved my life’ by allowing me to interrogate my writing in a way I have never been able to before. We should promote ChatGPT to students as a resource that can help tighten up their drafts before needing academic support. It should be utilised to alleviate the burden on academics, who are often asked to critique early drafts of work. Academics should hopefully then only see much more polished versions of submissions that require less input from them. 

As a final example, I didn’t like my last sentence. ChatGPT gave me another version:

It should be used to relieve the burden on academics who are frequently asked to critique early drafts. Ideally, academics would primarily review more polished submissions that require minimal input.

I didn’t like that version either. Maybe then I should just delete it? That is where the human side wins out over AI, your sense of self and how you want to sound when writing.

AI is here to stay (and take over the world if the Terminator documentaries are anything to go by), but actually, that is alright (AI being here as a tool, not taking over the world). At levels 4 and 5, we need to find creative ways to incorporate AI tools into the assessment process (which may mean fewer essays). Levels 6, 7 and 8, it’s about using AI to help improve our own voice but not lose it. 

The ChatGPT re-write: How ChatGPT Revolutionized My Writing Process – The AI version.

Credit Image: Photo by rupixen.com on Unsplash

Image in the text created by T. Langston using imgflip.com

S01E07 – Dr Lynn Gribble – Artificial Intelligence

TelTales Podcast
TelTales Podcast
S01E07 - Dr Lynn Gribble - Artificial Intelligence
Loading
/

In this special AI episode of the Tel Tales podcast, Associate Professor Lynn Gribble discusses the impact of artificial intelligence in higher education, and how assessment can be adapted to become more authentic for our students.

Associate Professor Lynn Gribble is an Education Focused academic in the School of Management and Governance at The University of New South Wales Sydney. Awarded an AAUT citation for her leadership and impact as a digital innovator, she has taught management to large classes of Master of Business Administration and Master of Commerce students for 15+ years and has pioneered the use of voice recordings, audience response platforms and learning analytics to personalise every interaction with her students, increasing both their engagement and learning outcomes. Lynn co-leads Communities of Practice in Online Learning and Innovation, and the 4Cs (A Strategic Approach to Impact) and is a Senior Fellow of the Advance HE UK.

You can read two recent recently published blog posts that Lynn has written on the impact of AI in higher education here…

Overconfident with ChatGPT and Generative AI – Time for our students to think again

https://www.education.unsw.edu.au/news-events/news/overconfident-chatgpt-and-generative-ai

Surviving the start of 2023 in the face of generative AI

https://www.education.unsw.edu.au/news-events/news/surviving-start-2023-generative-ai

You can subscribe to the Tel Tales podcasts on Spotify, Apple Podcasts or listen directly through the Tel Tales website.

Original audio created by Chris Wood for use with the Tel Tales podcast.

The AI Podcast – How we did it!

(Co-writer: ChatGPT)

There’s no doubt Artificial Intelligence (AI) will have a huge impact on the future of education and assessment.  I can’t think of a day that has gone past over the past few months where some form of AI chat hasn’t started within the office, often causing a healthy level of debate.  From the outrage of academics that students are using AI to generate degree-level work to the supposed “arms race” of technology companies to be the first to detect AI.  There’s no end to topics of conversation on the moral, technical, ethical and legal issues surrounding AI.    

With the Tel Tales Podcasts due to re-launch in the coming months, we thought it would be good to put AI to the test.  Could we create an entire podcast episode from AI?  Would it matter that it was AI generated?  Is this even possible?

To start the podcast off, we gave ChatGPT an open-ended initial prompt as follows…

“Write 6 questions to ask ChatGPT in a podcast about the impact ChatGPT will have on education”

Within a matter of seconds, ChatGPT was processing through its algorithms and writing a response to our initial prompt.  In less than a minute, ChatGPT responded with the following questions…

  1. How can ChatGPT be integrated into educational institutions to enhance the learning experience for students?
  2. What are the potential benefits and drawbacks of using ChatGPT in education, and how can these be mitigated?
  3. In what ways can ChatGPT be used to personalize learning for students with different learning styles and abilities?
  4. How can ChatGPT be used to facilitate communication and collaboration among students and teachers in online learning environments?
  5. How might the use of ChatGPT impact the role of teachers in education, and what skills might educators need to develop to effectively work with this technology?
  6. Could you conclude and summarise the impact that ChatGPT will have on education?

Looking at the response that was given, the questions that ChatGPT generated are certainly a good starting point, although very surface-level.  One of the biggest critiques of ChatGPT is the lack of “nuance, critical-thinking skills or ethical decision-making ability that are essential for successful journalism” (Lock, 2022).  Arguably, the questions generated cover a range of topics related to the use of ChatGPT in education that could lead to interesting and informative discussions.  ChatGPT is impressive on a surface level, but the reliance on using a machine for interaction or to generate conversations could lead to a loss of genuine human connection. The ability to connect with others through meaningful conversation and interactions is a fundamental aspect of being human.  The concept of outsourcing this to a machine could have detrimental side effects on our well-being and social skillset.  We learnt the true value of human interaction during the COVID pandemic and the severe impact the lack of meaningful human interaction had on mental health (Okabe-Miyamoto, 2021).  Without delving too deep into the content and ethical issues around this, the process took seconds to complete, with a total lack of human interaction apart from a very basic prompt.  Quite a scary thought!

These responses were then fed back into ChatGPT one at a time with the prefix “Write a 200-word response for a podcast to the question”, the results of this can be found at the bottom of this blog post.  Again, ChatGPT has provided plausible-sounding answers to its own questions.  However, it’s nothing new that we haven’t spoken about before, or anything game-changing.  Essentially, it’s just a series of ideas strung together from datasets.  We see themes that come up in nearly every answer around the “personalisation of learning” for students and how we can use AI to “engage” students.  The overemphasis in the responses on ‘buzzwords’ really highlights the lack of real input from a human; someone who is living and breathing this – an academic, a student, a head of school, a support team, a principal etc. Can we blame ChatGPT for its response?  Not really.  It’s done a pretty impressive job of answering its own questions and has generated some plausible responses, some of which will be popular with teachers – such as the reduction of marking load to allow teachers to focus on 1:1 learning with their students.  A glimmer of hope perhaps that ChatGPT acknowledges that a partnership between AI and teachers needs to be developed to unlock its full potential.  Maybe the machines are not taking over, just yet!

“With the right approach and training, ChatGPT can help usher in a new era of personalized, inclusive, and effective education.”  

After gaining our content, we used Speechify, to generate the audio.  Speechify has a range of voice actors – everything from Snoop Dogg to Gweneth Paltrow and uses AI to produce a natural voice, sensing the tone and intonation of text. Although the prospect of having Snoop Dogg; albeit a slightly static and stiff version of the OG himself, hosting our podcast would be amazing, we opted for British voice actors ‘Michael’ to host the podcast and ‘Stephanie’ to be the guest.  In recent news, David Guetta has spoken out about the use of AI in music and that “the future of Music is within AI”. There’s no doubt that this process of bringing AI-generated text ‘to life’ is taking the moral and ethical issues of AI writing and voice generation to a new level.  Could it be the next big “deep fake”; where AI voices are being used instead of the human equivalent?  Or that AI voices become so indistinguishable from the real human nuance of speech that it blurs the lines between reality and the matrix?  Either way, the results were good and we’re now starting to hear the results of our podcast.

After we had gathered our audio, we placed the audio files into Logic Pro X and used iZotope’s Ozone plugin for mixing and balancing.  The software uses AI to intelligently listen to the audio and suggest recommended settings.  We left everything with the settings that Ozone recommended for dynamics and equalisation – based on the audio files generated from Speechify.  It appears that gone are the days of building relationships with artists in a recording studio, akin to George Martin to refine and craft sound, when all that is needed is for an AI to “listen” and suggest settings, built on the foundations of those masters before. The final piece of the puzzle was to get some advertising for the podcast.  We asked ChatGPT to “write a tweet for @telportsmouth to advertise a totally AI-generated podcast for TelTales including hashtags” which has been used to advertise the podcast on our social media platforms.  We also asked Dall-e 2 to generate some AI artwork, with the prompt “AI-generated podcast from Tel Tales at Portsmouth University”, which you’ve probably seen before getting to this blog post. Did you even notice it was AI generated?  Had we not told you, would you have known? 

We loved creating this podcast.  In fact, it’s brought many more conversations into the office around the use of AI and how far we can (or should) push it.  Ultimately, ChatGPT is shaking the education sector to the core and making us re-evaluate our assessment methods – which is only ever a good thing!  ChatGPT is great at stringing a few sentences together to come up with a response.  However, is it not just generating content for content’s sake, with no real meaning?  Would you have even noticed this podcast was completely AI-generated, had we not told you?  Could we have made it more believable if we had “real-life” voice actors to narrate the script?  The answers ChatGPT gave for our podcast were plausible and spoke about relevant ideas and topics of discussion – but nothing more than that.  

With GPT4 on the horizon, will we see a ‘bigger and better’ version of this AI wizardry?  GPT4 promises to be able to respond to both text and images.  In theory, this multi-modal model should help the AI to understand the world we live in better and theorise more logical connections between datasets.  Perhaps this is only the beginning of our AI journey in education and further supports our need as educators to reevaluate our assessment methods.  As we’ve said before, this can only be a good thing!

Have we just done ourselves out of a job?  Probably not.  It is worth remembering that none of this was possible without that initial prompt and a “human” in the driving seat.  Does the future belong to AI? Not just yet, but it’s certainly one interesting journey we’re on!

Listen to the AI podcast 

Chris Wood

Follow me on Twitter @ChrisWoodTeach

References

Samatha Lock. (2022). What is AI chatbot phenomenon ChatGPT and could it replace humans? The Guardian. [Online]. 5th Dec 2022. Available at https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2022/dec/05/what-is-ai-chatbot-phenomenon-chatgpt-and-could-it-replace-humans [Accessed 14th March 2023].

Karynna Okabe-Miyamoto, Sonja Lyubomirsky. (2021). Social Connection and Well-Being during COVID-19. WHR 2021. 1(1), p.Chapter 6. [Online]. Available at: https://worldhappiness.report/ed/2021/social-connection-and-well-being-during-covid-19/ [Accessed 14 March 2023].

Artwork: AI-generated through Dall-e 2

Content: AI-generated through ChatGPT

Voice: AI-generated through Speechify

Mixing: AI-generated through iZotope Ozone

ChatGPT Responses

Question 1 Prompt:

Write a 200-word response for a podcast to the question “How can ChatGPT be integrated into educational institutions to enhance the learning experience for students?”

Question 1 Answer: 

ChatGPT, as a language model, has the potential to revolutionize the way students learn by providing personalized and interactive educational experiences. One way to integrate ChatGPT into educational institutions is through the use of chatbots. Chatbots powered by ChatGPT can provide students with instant feedback on their assignments, answer their questions, and provide additional resources that are tailored to their individual needs.

Moreover, ChatGPT can be integrated into learning management systems to create personalized learning paths for students. By analyzing a student’s learning history and performance data, ChatGPT can suggest customized learning resources and activities that are most relevant to the student’s interests and abilities. This can help students stay engaged and motivated as they learn.

Another way to integrate ChatGPT into educational institutions is by using it to create virtual learning assistants. These assistants can help students navigate complex topics, provide additional explanations or examples, and even engage in an interactive dialogue with students to promote deeper understanding and critical thinking.

Overall, the integration of ChatGPT into educational institutions has the potential to enhance the learning experience for students by providing personalized and interactive learning experiences that meet their individual needs and interests. By leveraging the power of AI, educational institutions can provide a more effective and engaging learning experience for students, preparing them for success in the modern world.

Question 2 Prompt:

Write a 200-word response for a podcast to the question “What are the potential benefits and drawbacks of using ChatGPT in education, and how can these be mitigated?”

Question 2 Answer: 

The potential benefits of using ChatGPT in education are numerous. ChatGPT can help personalize the learning experience for students, offer instant feedback and support, and assist with knowledge acquisition and retention. Furthermore, ChatGPT can assist in the creation of more engaging and interactive learning materials, which can improve student motivation and learning outcomes. However, there are also potential drawbacks to using ChatGPT in education. One concern is that the technology could lead to overreliance on AI, causing students to disengage from the learning process and rely too heavily on ChatGPT to provide answers instead of engaging in critical thinking and problem-solving. Additionally, there is the possibility of biased or inaccurate responses from ChatGPT, which could negatively impact learning outcomes. To mitigate these potential drawbacks, it is important to ensure that ChatGPT is used in conjunction with traditional teaching methods to encourage critical thinking and promote deeper learning. It is also important to ensure that the technology is thoroughly tested and evaluated for accuracy and fairness. Finally, it is important to provide appropriate training to both educators and students to ensure that they understand the role of ChatGPT in the learning process and can use it effectively. With these measures in place, the potential benefits of ChatGPT in education can be realized while mitigating potential drawbacks.

Question 3 Prompt:

Write a 200-word response for a podcast to the question “In what ways can ChatGPT be used to personalize learning for students with different learning styles and abilities?”

Question 3 Answer: 

One of the most promising applications of ChatGPT in education is its ability to personalize the learning experience for students with different learning styles and abilities. ChatGPT can analyze a student’s learning history and performance data to provide tailored resources and feedback that meet their individual needs.

For students who are visual learners, ChatGPT can generate images, videos, and other multimedia resources to enhance their learning experience. For students who are auditory learners, ChatGPT can generate audio recordings or podcasts. For students who are kinesthetic learners, ChatGPT can suggest interactive activities or simulations that allow them to engage with the material in a more hands-on way.

In addition, ChatGPT can provide targeted feedback and support that is customized to a student’s strengths and weaknesses. For example, if a student is struggling with a particular concept, ChatGPT can generate additional practice problems or explanations to help them master the material.

Overall, the ability of ChatGPT to personalize learning for students with different learning styles and abilities has the potential to significantly improve learning outcomes and engagement. By leveraging the power of AI, educational institutions can create a more inclusive and effective learning environment that meets the needs of all students, regardless of their learning style or ability.

Question 4 Prompt:

Write a 200-word response for a podcast to the question “How can ChatGPT be used to facilitate communication and collaboration among students and teachers in online learning environments?”

Question 4 Answer: 

ChatGPT can play a vital role in facilitating communication and collaboration among students and teachers in online learning environments. One way ChatGPT can achieve this is by creating virtual assistants that can provide real-time feedback and support to students. These virtual assistants can also help teachers by answering common questions, grading assignments, and providing additional resources to students who are struggling.

Moreover, ChatGPT can be integrated into online discussion forums and chat rooms to promote collaboration and engagement among students. ChatGPT can help students connect with one another and facilitate group discussions and peer-to-peer learning.

ChatGPT can also be used to create virtual study groups that can help students collaborate and learn from one another. By analyzing students’ learning histories and performance data, ChatGPT can suggest study partners or groups that are most likely to benefit from working together.

Finally, ChatGPT can be used to facilitate communication and collaboration between teachers and students. ChatGPT can help teachers provide real-time feedback to students, answer questions, and provide additional resources as needed. This can help create a more supportive and engaging learning environment that promotes learning and academic success.

Overall, the use of ChatGPT in online learning environments has the potential to significantly enhance communication and collaboration among students and teachers, creating a more engaging and effective learning experience for all involved.

Question 5 Prompt:

Write a 200-word response for a podcast to the question “How might the use of ChatGPT impact the role of teachers in education, and what skills might educators need to develop to effectively work with this technology?”

Question 5 Answer: 

The use of ChatGPT in education has the potential to significantly impact the role of teachers. With the introduction of AI-powered virtual assistants, teachers can offload certain tasks like grading, answering common questions, and providing additional resources. This can free up more time for teachers to focus on providing personalized and individualized support to students.

However, with the introduction of AI-powered technology like ChatGPT, educators will need to develop new skills to effectively work with this technology. Educators will need to become proficient in using and managing AI tools to create effective learning materials and assessments. They will need to understand how to use ChatGPT to personalize the learning experience for students, as well as how to integrate it into their teaching practices to facilitate communication and collaboration among students.

Moreover, educators will need to develop skills in data analysis to better understand student performance and adjust their teaching accordingly. They will need to be able to interpret the data generated by ChatGPT and use it to provide more effective feedback and support to students.

In summary, while the introduction of ChatGPT has the potential to significantly impact the role of teachers in education, it also presents an opportunity for educators to develop new skills that can help them create a more engaging and effective learning environment for their students.

Question 6 prompt:

Write a 200-word response for a podcast to the question “Could you conclude and summarise the impact that ChatGBP will have on education?”

Question 6 answer:

In conclusion, ChatGPT has the potential to revolutionize education by providing a personalized and engaging learning experience for students. It can help educators offload certain tasks and enable them to focus more on individualized support to students. It can also facilitate communication and collaboration among students, promoting a more inclusive and supportive learning environment.

However, the use of ChatGPT in education also presents some potential drawbacks, such as the risk of over-reliance on technology and the potential for bias in the data used to personalize the learning experience.

To mitigate these drawbacks, educators must be trained in how to effectively integrate ChatGPT into their teaching practices and be able to interpret and analyze the data generated by the technology. It’s also essential to continue to monitor and address any potential issues related to bias and ethical concerns.

Overall, ChatGPT has the potential to significantly enhance the learning experience for students and support educators in creating more effective and engaging teaching practices. While there are potential drawbacks that must be considered, the benefits of using ChatGPT in education are too significant to ignore. With the right approach and training, ChatGPT can help usher in a new era of personalized, inclusive, and effective education.

As a sidenote, I used ChatGPT to create the tweet to accompany my blog post, please see below. The possibilities with ChatGPT are endless!

ChatGPT AI-Generated Tweet

🎙️ Listen to the new Tel Tales podcast generated entirely by AI 🤖🎧 Join us for fascinating stories and insights about AI and beyond. #AIGenerated #TelTales #PortsmouthPodcast #TelTalesPodcasts 🌊🎉

© 2024 Tel Tales

Theme by Anders NorénUp ↑