Picture this: a top university, renowned for its commitment to innovation, diving headfirst into the world of ChatGPT. It's the kind of scenario that caught my attention recently when I stumbled upon an interesting article from the MIT Tech Review.
We all remember the introduction of ChatGPT. Many educational institutions were freaking out, concerned about the potential of cheating in the classroom, and apprehensive about the potential for essential aspects of the learning process to become obsolete. In fact, some schools went as far as to ban or prohibit the use of ChatGPT in their classrooms.
This article delves into a conversation with Jenny Frederick, the Associate Provost at Yale and the founding director of the Poorvu Center for Teaching and Learning.
While the article already provides a concise summary of the key takeaways and intriguing points from the conversation, I would like to contribute my two cents, beginning with a big shout-out to Yale!! I believe they are currently charting the most commendable course regarding the deployment of these technologies.
One point she raised particularly resonated with me: “If a robot could do it adequately, do I need to rethink what I'm asking my students to learn, or raise the bar on why it is important to know this?”. This point aligns with a comment made by a faculty advisor from the Poorvu Center. Mathematicians have been grappling with the fact that machines can do the work for decades now.
Until I read this article, I hadn't truly contemplated the extent to which mathematicians have been dealing with the repercussions of technology for such a long time now. We don't need to labor over deriving derivatives when SymboLab and Mathways, or even a good ole fashion TI-nSpire CX CAS, can complete such tasks within seconds or minutes.
Despite this persistent challenge, I believe we can confidently assert that mathematicians are coming out on top. After all, when has it ever not been a requirement to master a certain level of mathematics in an academic setting.
The mass publication of LLM's should not instill fear in educators and professors; instead, it should be viewed as an opportunity to further nurture and cultivate the culture and significance of education and learning to do things by yourself.
Food for thought.