51–60 of 68 posts
I've said it in another thread, but if you have to ban a tool to preserve the value of some course or examination then it's likely they have little to no value in the real world. In most cases the courses are fine, but the examination probably isn't testing anything useful if it can be cheated with tools like ChatGPT. For example any maths test which only tests students on problems which are easily solvable by a calc…
ChatGPT is just a tool, like a calculator. Calculators are banned in certain circumstances and required in others. At first they were probably seen as cheating, but then the system realized they could be used to enhance what kids learn. Why take away a tool that could be used everywhere in life? That's not how progress should work. The system should evolve to embrace such tools, but the obvious problem is that it jus…
Did you even read the article? You completely side stepped the argument they are making: > While the tool may be able to provide quick and easy answers to questions, it does not build critical-thinking and problem-solving skills, which are essential for academic and lifelong success
I learnt a ton from asking random questions to ChatGPT. This move is clearly temporary and will be reversed
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Did you even read the article? You completely side stepped the argument they are making: > While the tool may be able to provide quick and easy answers to questions, it does not build critical-thinking and problem-solving skills, which are essential for academic and lifelong success
But the article is wrong...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I see ChatGPT more akin to Wikipedia and Google than a calculator. We don't consider Wikipedia or Google as much of a tool as they are a knowledge reservoir of truthiness.
What is a "knowledge reservoir of truthiness"?
This system can’t prove its own work (at least not yet) before publishing the results. It just publishes, which is similar to Wikipedia and Google.
I've said it in another thread, but if you have to ban a tool to preserve the value of some course or examination then it's likely they have little to no value in the real world. In most cases the courses are fine, but the examination probably isn't testing anything useful if it can be cheated with tools like ChatGPT. For example any maths test which only tests students on problems which are easily solvable by a calc…
I've said it in another thread, but if you have to ban a tool to preserve the value of some course or examination then it's likely they have little to no value in the real world. In most cases the courses are fine, but the examination probably isn't testing anything useful if it can be cheated with tools like ChatGPT. For example any maths test which only tests students on problems which are easily solvable by a calc…
At the same time it is a completely different mode to operate. Writing and editing SQL while you are trying to solve a problem will lead you to a different way of thinking, iterating, maybe even induce fewer context switches.
Using ChatGPT can be similar to delegating those type of tasks to a colleague. There are upsides and downsides to this but never underestimate the benefits of strengthening your own abilities.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not sure I entirely agree. Imagine there's a trainable skill like writing, and GPT can write at low-intermediate level, but can't at high level. How do you test students before they completed intermediate level?
Make students write in the classroom using a pen and paper? Isn’t that more or less the standard at low-intermediate level?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Make students write in the classroom using a pen and paper? Isn’t that more or less the standard at low-intermediate level?
Handwriting is at least just as pointless exercise.
Assuming the teacher is doing their job, it should be really easy to make sure nobody is cheating using machine learning.