As AI platforms like ChatGPT, Copy.Ai, Grammarly, and similar tools become more prevalent and accessible, there are rising concerns about their usage in educational environments. However, faculty like Mass Media Department Chair Dr. Joe Watson have changed their perspective on incorporating AI in the classroom.
“I think a couple of years ago, when chat GPT first made its debut, I think everybody in academia was freaked out. I think we thought ‘here is a cheating tool that will be abused, that is one more way that students will fall into a trap of academic misconduct, and it could be potentially ugly’” said Watson.
After attending a conference last year, Dr. Watson heard “session after session” about many different ways professors might incorporate AI usages into their own classrooms and decided he could do the same. He described having an “epiphany” while attending a session, leading him to completely shift his perspective.
“This can actually be a tool. I can use this to help my students, and maybe it will not only reinforce what they’re learning content-wise in the class, but it will teach them to see how AI is not this magical thing that erases all of their problems.”
This semester, in his Mass Media and Society (MM140), and Mass Media Theory & Methods (MM376) classes, Watson assigned students to ask ChatGPT or any other AI platform to provide 150-300 word responces on the specific topics discussed in class. Students were then asked to analyze Chat GPT’s response: Is AI’s response correct? Why or why not? Did it leave out important details? What have you learned that’s missing from the analysis? Dr. Watson has also required students to have AI provide them with sources, and then students verify those sources. Watson explained that sometimes the sources given by AI are completely made up or just don’t exist.
“I want them to be educated and informed media consumers, and I think right now, the greatest thing I can do to achieve that goal is to help them see and understand the ways AI helps us and hurts us,” said Watson.
Watson’s goals with these assignments are to teach students how to incorporate what they’ve learned compared to AI analysis and to recognize flaws in these programs.
He explained that by doing these assignments, he’s trying to teach students two things: How to incorporate what they’ve learned and compare it to AI’s analysis but also show how flawed the system can be.
“By having chat GPT giving them 250 to 300 words on a [topic], they can pick it apart and bring in what they’ve learned,” Watson said.
Dr. Watson also wants to demonstrate that Chat GPT is not a shortcut, and can absolutely lead students to issues with academic integrity violations. Though many people believe that ChatGPT generates original writing, there have been cases of accidental plagiarism with the Chat GPT papers assigned in his classes.
“The number of plagiarism incidents that I’m finding has really surprised me,” he said. “Because everybody’s searching for the same stuff, AI is giving one student one thing, and it’s giving the same thing to another student. So I have gotten plagiarism reports of student A taking a paper from Student B in the same class on the same assignment.”
Watson mentioned that while using Chat GPT and other AI tools presents several disadvantages, these technologies can be advantageous for students, allowing them to find the information faster than searching for the one perfect article with the right information. But AI should not think for students. Using it to write a paper is still a form of academic misconduct. Dr. Watson hopes to continue integrating AI usage in the classroom and, for better AI detection development. Kaden Tarwater, a senior in Watson’s MM376 class, discussed four writing assignments involving the use of ChatGPT. “I have never dug that deep into ChatGPT myself, but heard from many friends that the writing for the most part is good,” Tarwater said. “After doing the assignment for the second time with a different topic, it was so clear to see the difference in a 20-year-olds writing compared to AI. It’s not horrible writing, just easily identifiable, for now.”
Both Watson and his students have enjoyed the assignments, specifically how they demonstrate both the downsides and potential benefits of generative AI.
“It has provided some really nice discussion in my classes, so now I see how it can be a tool for my discipline, as opposed to a threat to my discipline,” Watson said.
