A professor’s gripe
I remember sitting in my office last spring reading over student essays from my Journalism 101 class. I had assigned them to read a short think-piece on why Americans have lost their faith in the news and then write a one-page reflection distilling their thoughts on the topic.
Most of them were quite good; it’s an important issue. But midway through the stack, I stumbled onto the work of a brilliant, well-written young scholar. The first few paragraphs made me sit forward in my chair. Insightful arguments, crisp verbs, wonderful sentence structure. The kind of paper that makes most of us professorial-types smile smugly and think, “My god, I must be the greatest instructor since Socrates.”
But then, as you may have guessed, I got to the following problematic passage in the fourth paragraph:
“As an AI language model, I cannot have personal opinions or feelings, but I can provide an analysis of the points made in this article…”
Yikes.
Undoubtedly, AI has made tremendous strides in natural language processing, enabling it to generate coherent and grammatically correct essays on various subjects. For many students, the temptation to utilize AI-powered paper writing services is strong. It offers the allure of convenience, efficiency and the promise of impeccable grades with minimal effort.
Yet, while AI can be a useful tool in academia, it should not replace the fundamental processes of learning and critical thinking.
When students present AI-generated papers as their own work, they undermine the integrity of their educational institutions and devalue the hard work of their peers while simultaneously crushing their awesome professor’s ego.
As a teacher at heart, it’s my job to show students that education is not solely about the destination (i.e., getting a degree) but also about the journey of personal growth, acquiring knowledge and honing essential skills like critical thinking, research and writing. AI eliminates these essential learning opportunities.
Furthermore, the skills developed through writing — such as research, analysis and communication — are crucial in today’s job market. By outsourcing the writing process to AI, students miss out on the chance to develop these skills, which are transferable and highly sought-after by employers.
In the end, there is no shortcut to true learning and personal development. In the most cliché way, when you cheat, you’re often only cheating yourself.
Oh, and P.S. — other than the anecdote at the top, this column was written by an AI language model. I was too busy grading AI-generated papers to hit this deadline.
A student’s dilemma:
Artificial intelligence has taken the academic world by storm by allowing students to complete writing assignments in seconds without a single thought.
At least that is what academia seems to believe. The idea that artificial intelligence may be ruining the creative mind and hindering the learning process are overstatements that discredit the technological and personal advances that this technology offers students around the world.
In a post-COVID-19 world, the learning process in academic institutions has been flipped on its head. Zoom classes, online tests and the deregulation of standardized testing have left students and professors in a tough spot where they’ve both had to quickly adapt to a new way of learning.
With these adaptations recently came the emergence of artificial intelligence.
This semester, I have noticed in many of my syllabi that teachers have strictly forbidden the use of artificial intelligence in any form while completing assignments. As a public policy leadership major, this makes sense, considering many of my classes require in-depth analysis and personal opinions regarding how new policies affect citizens. Students have been given the opportunity to have every problem or reading assignment fully explained in seconds giving students time to synthesize well-thought-out arguments grounded in fact.
I place heavy emphasis on time, for I have only just a minute. As a student, time is among the most finite, valuable aspects of life. I guess that’s true in many walks of life. Still, a full-time student at 15 hours is clocking around 45 hours of work a week if they follow popular study methodology. While that sounds ridiculous, we all know students who slave away days in pursuit of enlightenment — err…I mean a degree. Considering this, AI becomes a valuable asset to an individual with their hands full already.
I understand the fear that artificial intelligence will cripple the creative mind, but the creative mind is resilient. Similar fears in the academic world were shared when the internet expanded to a global force. The internet did not make people less creative; it made them more creative. Any idea a young person had could be put to the test with unlimited outreach to people around the world. Artificial intelligence will do the same. Students can be assisted in making their muses come to life with technology designed to help do away with the tedious rituals the creative must go through to get their idea across.
Artificial intelligence is a tool; it is not humanity. Only humans can write profound pieces that connect to the personal experiences of others. Only humans can generate the works of Beethoven, Picasso and Mark Twain. Art and creativity are relative to the human experience, and a tool that instantaneously does away with the monotonous, tedious experiences of learning will not replace the students’ ability to grow and develop into a scholar.
The student who studies half-heartedly may use artificial intelligence as another way to do so. The student who uses artificial intelligence to further their education and make a statement to the world is one who supports the evolution of technology for decades to come.
R.J. Morgan is an instructional associate professor of journalism and director of the Mississippi Scholastic Press Association.
David Ramsey is a junior Public Policy Leadership major from Madison, Miss.
