AI/IA Artificial Intelligence or Automatic Inability?

Now there’s another AI for you!!

This time last year  AI / Chat GPT and all the other derivitives had not been made openly available.  They came online in October.

Since this date universities  have seen a massive rise in work being substantially (and more often than not entirely) produced using thse tools.

To your teachers, your Exam Board, your Faculty and your University, it is an ‘Alarme Incendie’ which takes you to the ‘Sortie’:

It represents a shortcut… yes… (but not the one you might be thinking of: a shortcut to a time-saving assignment submission; but rather to being instantly and definitively ‘shown the sortie‘ and failing an assignment, a semester, a year and or an entire academic programme [Degree or Master’s] with no offer of a re-sit possibility.

Why is this so?  Well, I’ll show your teachers’ reasoning as lecturers AND I will also show you that, when asked, would you believe, AI itself confirms and respects that perspective that its use in your academic work is inappropriate, unethical and cheating!

Our Perspective.

The intention of Higher Education is to see students’ capacities and capabilities significantly enhanced through the personal activity of learning.  AI use avoids learning in preference of a ‘quick fix’ in which the intellect is simply not involved.  It does not enhance you or your capabilities one ‘jot‘.

Think about this from the lecturer’s point of view:

1. An AI user would be presenting work (and is implicitly saying to the marker that this is all his own work) when it is demonstrably NOT his own work at all if AI has produced it!  The student submitting the work would be hoping for a mark, but why should / how can the tutor provide one to an individual who has contributed and produced nothing of his own?
2. This represents a determination to entirely avoid learning and goes against all that academic systems / standards represent. Bournemouth University’s crest is ‘Discere Mutare Est’: to Learn is to Change.  That’s the whole point!  But if you don’t learn, you can’t change and will leave at the level at which you came into university!  What purpose does this serve?  How would it help you in life or your career?
3. Your teachers cannot learn for you: they are responsible for their side (half) of the ‘bridge’ we build together: the ‘teaching‘ side, but they can’t go further than half way: students have to build their half of the ‘bridge‘ from the ‘learning‘ side to meet the teacher in the middle, having enhanced their knowledge, understanding, experience, research ability, analytical and evaluative abilities etc …. i.e. having ‘grown’ / ‘changed‘.  This bridge cannot be successfully built if the learning side is simply supplied by AI content in which the student has not been involved in at all intellectually.
4. What about employers?  Universities have an impled ‘contract’ with them in which the awarding university promises (and they accept) that the certificates  produced represent student learning outcomes and level. Universities are warranting that you really do possess the capabilities represented by the certificates furnishd (and your mark profile).  If  the use of AI isn’t stopped / prohibited, then these certificates will not be worth the paper they are written upon and employers will cease to trust them.  What then would be the point of Degrees or Master’s certificates – even universities themselves!?    Society cannot afford to let this happen or the whole system breaks down.

What does AI (Chat GPT 16/08/23) say about its use at Degree / Master’s levels:

« Purpose of the Assignment: The nature of the assignment matters. If the assignment is meant to assess your understanding of a topic, your critical thinking, and your ability to synthesize information, then using AI to generate content might be seen as circumventing the learning process and might be considered unethical.  »   [TJ: I would only disagree with the ‘might be’ – ALL of your assignments are bound to involve these aspects so ‘WILL be considered as unethical’ would be the case.]

« Learning Objectives: If the assignment is intended to help you develop certain skills, such as writing, research, critical thinking, and analysis, using AI to generate content could potentially undermine the purpose of the assignment. [TJ: just COULD?!? .. universities surely  argue that ALL assignments at Degree and Master’s level are aimed at doing this, so NO AI!]

« In general, the ethical approach is to use AI tools in a way that enhances your learning and does not compromise the principles of academic integrity. If you’re unsure whether using AI in a particular assignment is appropriate, it’s a good idea to consult your professors or instructors for guidance ». [TJ Good point – but UHA spell this out at the outset and using AI is therefore NOT acceptable. This is a non-negotiable!!]

Remember that the primary goal of education is to learn and grow, so it’s important to make choices that align with those goals while maintaining ethical standards. »  [TJ: AI takes the teacher’s / university’s side!]

I was about to write ‘think carefully before you think of using AI in the assignments you present for marking‘, but, frankly, don’t think about it at all: just don’t do it – there is no excuse for using it and the penalties are truly draconian as this is a ‘line in the sand’ / ‘ZAD‘: the line that absolutely MUST be defended at all costs for the reasons explained above. There are no second chances or ‘negotiations‘ for those having been found to have used AI yet claimed the work as their own.

You have been warned!

An apology before I finish.  I realise that the vast majority of you will never have used AI and will never be tempted to do so: for you the above  warning is wholly unnecessary, but you will be shocked by the number of students who were ‘tempted’ to do so in the 22-23 academic year: yes, even at L3, M1 and M2 levels. As such I cannot not state the situation and the consequences as you will understand, I’m sure.

TJ