ENGL003/-102

Reading Preparation Task 1 (2%)

Read the text and answer the questions:

Don’t assume students are eager AI

adopters

By Andrea L. Guzman | April 27, 2023

Inside Higher Ed

For the past few months, faculty and administrators have been trying to wrap their heads around (to find
a way to understand) what ChatGPT and other technologies of generative artificial intelligence mean for
higher education. I, like many other scholars of technology and society, think that we are in the midst of
a profound technological and social shift on the magnitude of that of the internet, if not bigger.

Yet, as someone who studies human-machine communication, specifically people’s perceptions of and
interactions with AI, and who has been teaching undergraduate and graduate students about artificial
intelligence in journalism and communication for nearly a decade, I have found much of the discourse to
be based on faulty assumptions surrounding students’ general knowledge of and attitudes toward AI. My
fear is that the current knee-jerk (automatic and unthinking) reaction to ChatGPT will shape the higher ed
response to AI, with potentially devastating effects in the long term.

Misunderstanding Students

Media coverage and faculty discourse surrounding ChatGPT and generative AI have revealed a narrative
of panic around the capabilities of these technologies to carry out a variety of intellectual tasks and the
ways students may use them when completing their work. The introduction of ChatGPT has been met
with a rush to police its use to prevent academic misconduct.

Let me say that as an educator for 16 years, I am not so naïve as to think that generative AI will not be
used to cheat. Students throughout history have used a variety of technologies to do so, and I have an
automated-writing technology policy in my course. But what I find disconcerting (disturbing) is that much
of the conversation among educators is the not-so-implicit assumption that when given the opportunity,
students will use AI to cheat or in other ways ultimately detrimental (harmful) to their learning. In other
words, students will use technology, no questions asked, if it makes their lives easier.

The problem with such an assumption is that it falsely oversimplifies students’ perceptions and use of
technology generally and AI specifically. Such an attitude is an extension of the “students as digital
natives” fallacy that incorrectly paints students as “natural,” “eager” and “adept” users of any
technology. Research has repeatedly demonstrated that people’s attitudes toward and behavior with
technology are highly complex and shaped by a variety of factors.

Yes, students use technology to cheat, but they also use it to learn, and history has shown us repeatedly
that far more students use it to learn than cheat.

In this vein and in a rejoinder (response) to the calls for limiting AI in the classroom, other educators have
advocated for integrating and embracing AI in teaching to better prepare students for life in a world
shaped by artificial intelligence. I wholeheartedly agree that teaching students how to use AI for learning
and within the context of their future careers is important and that helping them to understand AI’s far-
reaching implications for self and society, including ethical issues, is just as critical.

At the same time, the discourse surrounding this goal seems to indicate that faculty members simply
need to show students how to correctly use AI and future generations will be on their way to success.
Similar to the narrative surrounding AI and cheating, this conversation also is built upon simplistic
assumptions regarding student attitudes toward technology, as well as misconceptions regarding the
complexities of teaching with and about AI.
Whose Reactions to AI Are We Putting First: Students’ or Our Own?

Long-standing misperceptions of student technology use aside, I think much of the debate surrounding
ChatGPT and generative AI in the classroom and initial drafting of policies on AI-related academic
misconduct say more about faculty and administrators’ own reactions to AI than about students. Indeed,
many of the general markers of the complexities of making sense of AI—drawing upon or making
references to science fiction and deeply emotional and felt responses—can be found in how faculty and
administrators have talked about and created policies around generative AI.

I’m not making this claim to sound glib (fluent but insincere) or dismissive of the efforts of my own
colleagues or of peers at other institutions. Far from it. My goal is to make the assumptions fueling the
faculty response to AI salient (important) so that they can be addressed and kept in check. A key lesson I
have learned in studying and teaching about AI is that a person can quickly become distracted and
overwhelmed by the hype surrounding AI—and there is a great deal of it—and by the emotional
elements of watching machines increasingly become better at a task than a person who has trained their
entire life.

As scholars and educators, we have to consciously fight against knee-jerk responses and simplistic
assumptions. Admittedly this is extremely hard to put into practice when a disruptive technology, such as
ChatGPT, is suddenly thrust upon us instead of slowly being introduced over time, as with the internet.
Moving forward will require a conscious effort on the part of those at all levels of higher education to
look beyond the fictions of AI toward its realities and guide our students to do the same.

1) What is the main issue/idea of this article?

…........................................................................................................................................................
...........................................................................................................................................................

2) Who is the author? What are his/her credentials?

…........................................................................................................................................................
...........................................................................................................................................................

3) What is the author’s purpose? To inform? To persuade? To entertain?

…........................................................................................................................................................
...........................................................................................................................................................

4) Who is the author’s intended audience?

…........................................................................................................................................................
..........................................................................................................................................................
5) In which context is this article written? (When is it published? where is it published? Any cultural
issues surrounding the article?

…........................................................................................................................................................
...........................................................................................................................................................

6) What is the writer’s position? Is he for or against the issue?

...........................................................................................................................................................
..........................................................................................................................................................

7) What is the writer trying to prove in this article? What is his/her claim? Where is it in the article?

…........................................................................................................................................................
...........................................................................................................................................................

8) What are the reasons behind the writer’s opinion? How many are they? Are they good reasons?

…........................................................................................................................................................
...........................................................................................................................................................

9) How does the writer support his argument? Does he use evidence from personal experience,
examples, statistics, research, observations, logical sequence of ideas, testimonies, etc.? Has the
evidence strengthened or weakened the argument?

…........................................................................................................................................................
..........................................................................................................................................................

10) Does the evidence come from relevant and reliable sources? How do you know?

…........................................................................................................................................................
...........................................................................................................................................................

11) Is the writer biased? If yes, why do you say so?

If not, what is the opposing point of view to the writer’s argument? Where is it in the article?
What are the reasons behind this view? Does the writer respond to the counterargument? Is the
writer’s refutation strong enough to show the weakness in the opponent’s point of view?

…........................................................................................................................................................
...........................................................................................................................................................