You gave them a task, they used their imagination to apply it, in a different way than you expected, by using a new tool which is a non traditional method you asked for but the task still got completed. They still loosely completed the task 30 times ahead of schedule by using their imagination on how to constructively solve your problem, utilizing a tool in their imaginary bag.
I don’t think it’s wrecking the system as long as the LLMs could be trained and ensure strict accuracy (yes I know they can be inaccurate but again so is any tool in its infancy), the system fails people everyday as a whole. I think it’s changing the traditional paradigm. Maybe for the better, maybe not. Time will tell. I think ChatGPT is a tool in its infancy. It’s changing the way minds think fundamentally like for isntance critical thinking skills decline by relying on “AI” but it frees up the mind to grow in other ways to adjust to the new paradigm.
I think the true point here is fear from breaking traditional values. Humans have never accelerated faster with current technology thats with or without LLM usage.
This is such a concavebrained take. The point of exercises handed out in schools isn’t the accomplishment of the set tasks; it’s that students internalise the processes necessary to do the task themselves and thereby learn those skills.
Thus, giving away a task to a LLM is only “using their imagination on how to constructively solve [the] problem, utilising a tool in their imaginary bag” in the same way that bullying a nerd into doing the work for them used to be.
I think it’s changing the traditional paradigm. Maybe for the better, maybe not. Time will tell. I think ChatGPT is a tool in its infancy. It’s changing the way minds think fundamentally like for isntance critical thinking skills decline by relying on “AI” but it frees up the mind to grow in other ways to adjust to the new paradigm.
This is so obviously for the worse. Losing the ability to think critically isn’t “freeing up the mind to grow in other ways:” basic critical thought is a foundational prerequisite to fully developing as a person capable of participating in society in the current age in much the same way as basic literacy is. It’s limiting the mind from growing in any meaningful way.
And don’t get it twisted, you’re just saying this shit to be contrarian. I doubt you actually believe this development could be a good thing. Like come the fuck on, let’s say in ten years’ time you get into some kinda accident and need surgery. There is no way you’d would want your surgeon to be someone who ‘did’ most of their assessments in med school with a fucking chatbot. Who are you kidding???
You’re not wrong, but the difference is that they came up with a creative solution to avoid the task, not a creative solution to engage the task. If I ask them follow up questions to explain their thoughts and reasoning behind their own work, I get deer in the headlights.
Now, I think the tide is rising with AI and it’s sink or swim if you’re a teacher, so it’s better to just learn what AI is and how to leverage it no matter what people think of it, or if I’m even getting paid for my effort.
A different approach I’m considering is embracing AI for teenage groups and changing the format of the course entirely so there’s more interaction (incorporating AI) than production. I’ll be the first at my school to do it, but I’m also the only person there who could tell you what the fediverse is.
Now I get that 100 percent. Avoiding the task makes total sense, especially coming from students of all ages. I absolutely think critical thinking skills are foundational to understanding and knowledge and need to be practiced, learned so much more than they are.
I think rather than free range use of LLMs or any other tool there needs to be some guidance. I don’t think clogging the system with dumb laws will do it, and I certainly don’t have all the answers. But with the usage of GPT if it can be made explicitly accurate within reason, one can gain knowledge at an accelerated rate due to the speed it can process vast data.
Its awesome to see teachers, educators trying to evolve and improve the learning experience which we desperately need. So thanks for putting in the extra effort whether your rewarded or not financially. The real people the got failed, or generally care thank you for your efforts!
Maybe it was a task they considered shitty and uninteresting. Not trying to be insulting but a lot of teachers have this problem. They assign a task they think will be interesting and captivating to their students only to be disappointed or irritated that their students didnt find it nearly as interesting or fun as the teacher did. You want them to pay attention make it real and relevant to them. That last part being especially important.
You gave them a task, they used their imagination to apply it, in a different way than you expected, by using a new tool which is a non traditional method you asked for but the task still got completed. They still loosely completed the task 30 times ahead of schedule by using their imagination on how to constructively solve your problem, utilizing a tool in their imaginary bag.
I don’t think it’s wrecking the system as long as the LLMs could be trained and ensure strict accuracy (yes I know they can be inaccurate but again so is any tool in its infancy), the system fails people everyday as a whole. I think it’s changing the traditional paradigm. Maybe for the better, maybe not. Time will tell. I think ChatGPT is a tool in its infancy. It’s changing the way minds think fundamentally like for isntance critical thinking skills decline by relying on “AI” but it frees up the mind to grow in other ways to adjust to the new paradigm.
I think the true point here is fear from breaking traditional values. Humans have never accelerated faster with current technology thats with or without LLM usage.
Holy fuck, we are so cooked.
This is such a concavebrained take. The point of exercises handed out in schools isn’t the accomplishment of the set tasks; it’s that students internalise the processes necessary to do the task themselves and thereby learn those skills.
Thus, giving away a task to a LLM is only “using their imagination on how to constructively solve [the] problem, utilising a tool in their imaginary bag” in the same way that bullying a nerd into doing the work for them used to be.
This is so obviously for the worse. Losing the ability to think critically isn’t “freeing up the mind to grow in other ways:” basic critical thought is a foundational prerequisite to fully developing as a person capable of participating in society in the current age in much the same way as basic literacy is. It’s limiting the mind from growing in any meaningful way.
And don’t get it twisted, you’re just saying this shit to be contrarian. I doubt you actually believe this development could be a good thing. Like come the fuck on, let’s say in ten years’ time you get into some kinda accident and need surgery. There is no way you’d would want your surgeon to be someone who ‘did’ most of their assessments in med school with a fucking chatbot. Who are you kidding???
You’re not wrong, but the difference is that they came up with a creative solution to avoid the task, not a creative solution to engage the task. If I ask them follow up questions to explain their thoughts and reasoning behind their own work, I get deer in the headlights.
Now, I think the tide is rising with AI and it’s sink or swim if you’re a teacher, so it’s better to just learn what AI is and how to leverage it no matter what people think of it, or if I’m even getting paid for my effort.
A different approach I’m considering is embracing AI for teenage groups and changing the format of the course entirely so there’s more interaction (incorporating AI) than production. I’ll be the first at my school to do it, but I’m also the only person there who could tell you what the fediverse is.
Now I get that 100 percent. Avoiding the task makes total sense, especially coming from students of all ages. I absolutely think critical thinking skills are foundational to understanding and knowledge and need to be practiced, learned so much more than they are.
I think rather than free range use of LLMs or any other tool there needs to be some guidance. I don’t think clogging the system with dumb laws will do it, and I certainly don’t have all the answers. But with the usage of GPT if it can be made explicitly accurate within reason, one can gain knowledge at an accelerated rate due to the speed it can process vast data.
Its awesome to see teachers, educators trying to evolve and improve the learning experience which we desperately need. So thanks for putting in the extra effort whether your rewarded or not financially. The real people the got failed, or generally care thank you for your efforts!
Maybe it was a task they considered shitty and uninteresting. Not trying to be insulting but a lot of teachers have this problem. They assign a task they think will be interesting and captivating to their students only to be disappointed or irritated that their students didnt find it nearly as interesting or fun as the teacher did. You want them to pay attention make it real and relevant to them. That last part being especially important.
Do you have a suggestion?