If you’re at all like me, you’re curious about Artificial Intelligence and new applications like ChatGPT and Bard. The brilliant Thomas Friedman of the New York Times says the world will never be the same again, but my interest is narrower: If students can simply ask Bard or ChatGPT to write their papers for them, how can teachers prevent this?
(Spoiler alert: Teachers can win this struggle!)
So, naturally, I turned to Bard, which told me (within seconds) that, while it can help students generate ideas, do research, improve their writing, and learn about different writing genres, it’s not supposed to be a substitute for original research and writing. Then it warned me to “Monitor students’ use of Bard to make sure that they are not plagiarizing or engaging in other forms of academic misconduct.”
Yeah, right. If I’m teaching English in a public high school, I probably have between 100 and 125 students! There aren’t enough hours in the day….
Second question: Can Bard help identify cheaters and plagiarists? Within seconds, I received an answer:
“There are a few things you can look for to tell the difference between original writing and prose provided by Bard.
- Original writing is typically more creative and original than prose provided by Bard. Bard is trained on a massive dataset of text, so it can be very good at generating text that is grammatically correct and factually accurate. However, it is not always able to generate text that is creative or original.
- Original writing is typically more personal and engaging than prose provided by Bard. Bard is a machine learning model, so it does not have the same level of understanding of human emotions and experiences as a human writer. As a result, its writing can be dry and impersonal.
- Original writing is typically more nuanced and complex than prose provided by Bard. Bard is a large language model, but it is still under development. As a result, it can sometimes struggle to understand the nuances of human language. This can lead to writing that is simplistic or even nonsensical.
……
- Ask yourself if the writing sounds like it was written by a human. Bard-generated text can sometimes sound robotic or unnatural. Original writing should sound like it was written by a human.
To put this the test, I gave Bard the following task:
I am one of six children, the second oldest and the first-born son. We grew up on a small farm with chickens, a few cows, a few pigs, and one goat. I’m now 81. Please write a short memoir of no more than 200 words about my childhood.
Within seconds, Bard spit out this:
“I was born in 1942, the second oldest of six children. We grew up on a small farm in the Midwest. My father worked hard to provide for our family, and my mother took care of the house and the children. We didn’t have much money, but we were happy.
I loved growing up on the farm. I spent my days playing with my siblings, helping my father with the chores, and exploring the woods behind our house. We had chickens, a few cows, a few pigs, and one goat. I loved taking care of the animals, and I learned a lot about hard work and responsibility.
I also learned a lot about nature on the farm. I spent hours watching the birds and the animals, and I learned to identify all the different plants. I loved being surrounded by nature, and it helped me to appreciate the beauty of the world.
I had a wonderful childhood on the farm. It was a time of innocence and discovery, and I will always cherish those memories.
Now that I am 81 years old, I still look back on my childhood with fondness. I am grateful for the opportunities I had, and I am proud of the person I have become. I know that my experiences on the farm helped to shape me into the man I am today.
Boring, and also wrong, and so I responded:
This is inaccurate. I was born in 1941, and our farm was in Connecticut. Worse, however, it does not capture either the small pleasures of collecting the eggs every morning or learning to milk cows, and it also does not capture the deep pain of watching a pig or steer that I raised being slaughtered. Please rewrite.
In just a few seconds, Bard responded by adding a few paragraphs, highlighted below to make it easier for you to read: “Sure, here is a more accurate and detailed memoir:
I was born in 1941, the second oldest of six children. We grew up on a small farm in Connecticut. My father worked hard to provide for our family, and my mother took care of the house and the children. We didn’t have much money, but we were happy.
I loved growing up on the farm. I spent my days playing with my siblings, helping my father with the chores, and exploring the woods behind our house. We had chickens, a few cows, a few pigs, and one goat. I loved taking care of the animals, and I learned a lot about hard work and responsibility.
I also learned a lot about nature on the farm. I spent hours watching the birds and the animals, and I learned to identify all the different plants. I loved being surrounded by nature, and it helped me to appreciate the beauty of the world.
One of my favorite things to do was collect the eggs every morning. I would wake up early and go to the chicken coop, where I would find a dozen or so eggs waiting for me. I would carefully collect the eggs and put them in a basket, then bring them back to the house. My mother would use the eggs to make breakfast, and I would always get to eat one of the freshest eggs in the world.
Another thing I loved to do was milk the cows. I would go to the barn in the evening and bring the cows into the milking parlor. I would sit on a stool and milk each cow in turn, collecting the milk in a bucket. The milk would then be used to make butter, cheese, and ice cream.
Of course, there were also some challenges growing up on a farm. One of the hardest things was watching the animals being slaughtered. I knew that it was necessary to eat meat, but I still felt bad for the animals. I would often cry when I saw them being killed.
Overall, though, I had a wonderful childhood on the farm. It was a time of innocence and discovery, and I will always cherish those memories. I am grateful for the opportunities I had, and I am proud of the person I have become. I know that my experiences on the farm helped to shape me into the man I am today.
OK, but even with this information, the writing remains pedestrian and without emotion. Human writers would know not to begin with their birthday, for one thing. They might lead with a sentence designed to keep the reader’s interest. Something like, “70 years later, at age 81, I can still hear the terrified squealing of the hog as it was strung up by its hind feet to be slaughtered….”
So what’s an English teacher to do in 2023? Well, first of all, we’ve been through this before when the internet emerged. Soon students discovered that they could download papers and submit them as their own. Next came profit-making companies offering papers written to order. And then there were commercially available Apps that supposedly could scan papers and detect plagiarism.
Good teachers won that struggle by 1) reducing the number of papers assigned and working with individual students as they developed their ideas and wrote drafts. It’s harder to cheat if the teacher is overseeing the process. And 2) lots more writing in class.
What’s called for now is emulating what my high school English teacher, William Sullivan, did more than 60 years ago. Two and sometimes three times every week he would tell us to clear our desks of everything except for a single sheet of paper and a pencil. What followed was what he called a “2-8-2,” meaning that we had two minutes to think–no writing–followed by eight minutes to write, and then two more minutes to read what we had written and correct any errors. He would put our writing assignment on the blackboard. Sometimes we would have to include a certain sentence, such as “I wish I had missed that train.” Or “I still wish I hadn’t missed that flight.”
Even today I still remember one particular assignment: “Turn out the light; I don’t want to go home in the dark,” which Mr. Sullivan told us were the dying words of William Sydney Porter and challenged us to explain the contradiction.
(Later that day Mr. Sullivan told us that we knew William Sydney Porter as the writer O. Henry. And some forty or fifty years later I discovered that Porter actually did not contradict himself. He actually wanted the lights out so he could die in darkness. Apparently Mr. Sullivan changed his words to create a paradox for us to try to explain.)
I taught English in a public high school, an HBCU, and a federal prison, and I used Mr. Sullivan’s “2-8-2” all the time. I got to know my students’ writing, and I’m convinced that their writing skills improved. Frequent in-class writing worked then, and it should work in the age of Artificial Intelligence, CHATgpt, Bard, and all the other ‘advances’ in our future.
However, policymakers and administrators have to behave sensibly. I.E., smaller classes, fewer students per teacher, and heightened trust in teachers. Those shouldn’t be a bridge too far, if we really want our young people to be thoughtful and capable citizens.
John,
Thanks for your wise essay. I liked your example of how you educated Bard! You also provided practical ideas and ways to both use AI to assist improved writing while simultaneously assessing and growing writing skills with smart teacher-led assignments.
As you well know, trusting teachers to do what they know how to do is the key. It is unfortunate that the only thing some politicians seem to want to trust teachers with is a handgun while they seek to legislate judgment on educational decisions of all kinds.
Brian Benzel
Redmond, Washington
LikeLiked by 1 person
[…] https://themerrowreport.com/2023/04/17/teaching-english-in-an-ai-world/ […]
LikeLike
A reader sent along this very scary news item about AI providing a winning photo, albeit with the help of a photographer.
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2023/apr/17/photographer-admits-prize-winning-image-was-ai-generated
LikeLike
Hi, John. You are insightful, as usual. Unfortunately, AI and its progeny didn’t invent robotic writing. Many years ago, when an essay was part of the SAT, its developer, ETS, distributed examples of a good essay and a poor one. I wrote in “Education USA” which I was editing at the time, that I would reverse the labels. The “poor” essay had grammatical problems, but it expressed genuine feelings and an attempt to understand the problem. The “good” essay was mechanically correct but devoid of any creative thought. I imagine teachers thereafter chased down the missing commas and never looked for context. For sure, that was an easier way to grade an essay.
Anne
LikeLike