Obviously, the advent of AI in the world of education raises fundamental questions, particularly with regard to the evaluation process. In addition, several stakeholders are rightly wondering about the extent of the place that should be given to AI in the students’ curriculum. Finally, some specialists in the world of education wonder, given the rapid growth of the arrival of AI in schools, if our automated society is not forgetting that it is the brain human who designed it.
Unsurprisingly, artificial intelligence (AI), and more specifically the ChatGPT robot, are making their presence felt at breakneck speed, so that CEGEP professors and lecturers are sounding the alarm and calling for emergency a moratorium in order to slow down the development of artificial intelligence, the stakeholders being confused in front of an explosion of cases of cheating on the part of the pupils.
However, where the problem is most acute is that it is difficult to prove beyond any doubt that there was cheating since the effectiveness of detection software is limited. And, what’s more, capsules circulating on TikTok show how to bypass detection software. It is the squaring of the circle. Professors and lecturers have literally lost control of this new technology.
Tags to be determined
It is high time that all stakeholders in higher education, including the Minister of Higher Education, Pascale Déry, decree a moratorium, take a time out and set uniform guidelines for all higher education institutions in Europe. regard to the secure use of ChatGPT in each of the institutions.
The student curriculum, or programs of study, sets out the “what”, that is, what students are expected to know, understand and be able to do in each subject and at each grade level. From this definition of the curriculum, the question of the use of AI within course programs arises with great relevance.
First of all, in my opinion, caution with regard to AI seems essential to me, otherwise teachers will literally be transformed into “guides” to students who will only have eyes for ChatGPT. In other words, the master-student relationship, which is the engine of all communication of knowledge to students, risks disappearing in favor of the “coldness” of a robot.
Consequently, AI must remain a means and not an end. Teachers must build their lesson plans with the objective of occasional use of AI when it brings additional relevant information to their course content. .
Management
In my opinion, any new pedagogical approach based on a new technology, whatever it may be, must be framed by strict guidelines to avoid a harmful overflow on the pedagogical act, the foundation of which is based on the teacher-learner duality.
However, my intention here is not to completely reject the arrival of AI in schools, but rather to give it a reasonable place in the fields of application that will have been predetermined by teachers in their respective disciplines.
The school is a place of learning but also a place of acquisition of values, such as respect for others, a sense of effort, and education in socialization. In this context, it seems to me essential, even vital, that it retain this very useful vocation for the emancipation of the adults of tomorrow. Finally, I am of the opinion that we must make room for AI insofar as it acts in addition to the course content of the professors.
Henry Marineau, Retired from high school teaching, Quebec