When the chatbot writes the homework

ChatGPT: Teachers’ association pleads for openness in schools

Even the ethics council, which advises the federal government, has just attested to ChatGPT in its statement on AI that the system is “so convincing and differentiated that even answers to complex tasks such as the preparation of scientific papers cannot be distinguished from high-quality human input”.

>> Also read: This is how ChatGPT works

Teachers now have to decide: What are grades still worth when students let artificial intelligence work for them, and what does that mean for the lessons of tomorrow? New York, for example, had blocked school servers from accessing ChatGPT, while the German teachers’ association advocated open communication.

A few ministers of education still think they are safe: In principle, the program can write homework and specialist work, for example in Lower Saxony. However, it still has such great weaknesses that the teacher usually recognizes it as foreign work or contains recognizable errors, says a spokesman for Lower Saxony’s Minister of Education, Julia Willie Hamburg (Greens).

Recognizing ChatGPT: Lower Saxony trusts the intuition of the teachers

Student Karina laughs: “The teachers believe that, but I know countless cases in which they have no idea that we don’t write the texts ourselves.”

However, the first educators reacted: “Our English teacher already distrusts everyone, only lets us read texts at home and takes tests in class with questions about the content – but then she also has to check them.”

While Lower Saxony relies on the intuition of the teachers, NRW has written a handout for teachers: A ban is “remote from reality”, it says.

ChatGPT and Co. – OpenAI’s competitors have various programs in the works or are already on the market – are an opportunity and a danger at the same time. “We would therefore like to ask you to deal openly and constructively with the new possibilities and to address them in class,” appealed Education Minister Dorothee Feller (CDU).

ChatGPT startles the Ministers of Education

The Conference of Ministers of Education already dealt with ChatGPT at the beginning of March and invited the Kiel business informatics specialist Doris Weßels. She urged the Handelsblatt to integrate this technology “with its potential into the classroom, of course taking the risks into account”.

We have to rethink today’s tasks for homework and study papers, including our exam culture. Doris Weßels, business IT specialist

Because: “It doesn’t help, schools and universities must not be isolated universes. ChatGPT and comparable AI force us to intensive self-reflection: We have to rethink today’s assignments for homework and study work, including our exam culture, even if the resulting changes will be very exhausting.”

But it no longer makes sense to have students write essays about the Habsburgs or rare earths if only knowledge is reproduced, says Weßels. In order to prevent AI from doing the homework, “the topics must give enough space for personal development so that students can contribute their perspectives and experiences”.

AI expert: Teachers must sensitize students to ChatGPT

Teachers would have to discuss the new forms of learning in a world with AI with the students and train them to use the bot, says AI expert Weßels. “So that they understand how such programs work, what they can do and how to critically question the results.” However, there is not much time for that, “we cannot research it for a year, we have to have the courage to break new ground quickly explore and dare to try”.

For the universities, the science ministers refer to their autonomy. “Despite the remarkable progress of AI, there is currently no reason for alarmism,” says its President Peter-André Alt. In principle, the secret use of AI is prohibited according to the study regulations. In addition, the performance of the AI ​​is “still limited” and “still relatively easy to identify”. Above all, the system cannot provide any source information.

“ChatGPT wrote me the state of the art chapter”

This applies to complete work, but not to parts, says mechatronics student Christian Renge*. “I had ChatGPT write the chapter on the state of the art for delta robots for a thesis, i.e. those with arms that are used for packaging, for example. It was so good that I was able to take over it one-to-one.” The student saved himself the time-consuming literature research, he finds it “simply awesome”.

>> Read here: How ChatGPT and Sam Altman will impact your life

ChatGPT formulated the introduction for his bachelor thesis on batteries. However, to be sure that the bot isn’t writing nonsense, “you have to know your way around,” he admits.

Of course, ChatGPT cannot provide any real sources, it is “not a search engine, but a text generator that strings together word syllables on the basis of statistical plausibility,” Weßels clarifies. But: “The chatbot invents sources so well that non-experts don’t even suspect that they could be wrong.” This raises the question of whether schools or universities will have to use software, so-called “detectors”, in the future to detect AI-generated find texts. Open AI itself has released the AI ​​Text Classifier program, which can be used to discover many, but not all, AI-written texts.

Ethics Council: ChatGPT forces new education debate

“We should avoid this rabbit-hedgehog race and use our energy better to realign our didactics,” recommends the computer scientist. It is important to formulate tasks that require the students’ own initiative: “Project work in which they solve realistic problems.” That is more motivating anyway. “Generative AI is forcing us to modernize pedagogy, as we should have done long ago.” She herself only awards bachelor’s and master’s theses in which students can demonstrate their problem-solving skills with companies on real tasks.

The Ethics Council also believes that ChatGPT is forcing “a renewed discussion of what education is and should be”. You have to clarify what is relevant knowledge and what skills and abilities learners still need – and which may have lost relevance.

* Names changed by editors

More: How convincing is a ChatGPT application?