'Writing Is Thinking': Do Students Who Use ChatGPT Learn Less?
"It was very clear that ChatGPT had decided this is a common woman's name," said Leitzinger, who teaches an undergraduate class on business and society at the University of Illinois in Chicago.
"They weren't even coming up with their own anecdotal stories about their own lives," she told AFP.
Leitzinger estimated that around half of her 180 students used ChatGPT inappropriately at some point last semester -- including when writing about the ethics of artificial intelligence (AI), which she called both "ironic" and "mind-boggling".
So she was not surprised by recent research which suggested that students who use ChatGPT to write essays engage in less critical thinking.
The preprint study, which has not been peer-reviewed, was shared widely online and clearly struck a chord with some frustrated educators.
The team of MIT researchers behind the paper have received more than 3,000 emails from teachers of all stripes since it was published online last month, lead author Nataliya Kosmyna told AFP.
For the small study, 54 adult students from the greater Boston area were split into three groups. One group used ChatGPT to write 20-minute essays, one used a search engine, and the final group had to make do with only their brains.
The researchers used EEG devices to measure the brain activity of the students, and two teachers marked the essays.
The ChatGPT users scored significantly worse than the brain-only group on all levels. The EEG showed that different areas of their brains connected to each other less often.
And more than 80 percent of the ChatGPT group could not quote anything from the essay they had just written, compared to around 10 percent of the other two groups.
By the third session, the ChatGPT group appeared to be mostly focused on copying and pasting.
The teachers said they could easily spot the "soulless" ChatGPT essays because they had good grammar and structure but lacked creativity, personality and insight.
However Kosmyna pushed back against media reports claiming the paper showed that using ChatGPT made people lazier or more stupid.
She pointed to the fourth session, when the brain-only group used ChatGPT to write their essay and displayed even higher levels of neural connectivity.
Kosmyna emphasised it was too early to draw conclusions from the study's small sample size but called for more research into how AI tools could be used more carefully to help learning.
Ashley Juavinett, a neuroscientist at the University of California San Diego who was not involved in the research, criticised some "offbase" headlines that wrongly extrapolated from the preprint.
"This paper does not contain enough evidence nor the methodological rigour to make any claims about the neural impact of using LLMs (large language models such as ChatGPT) on our brains," she told AFP.
Leitzinger said the research reflected how she had seen student essays change since ChatGPT was released in 2022, as both spelling errors and authentic insight became less common.
Sometimes students do not even change the font when they copy and paste from ChatGPT, she said.
But Leitzinger called for empathy for students, saying they can get confused when the use of AI is being encouraged by universities in some classes but is banned in others.
The usefulness of new AI tools is sometimes compared to the introduction of calculators, which required educators to change their ways.
But Leitzinger worried that students do not need to know anything about a subject before pasting their essay question into ChatGPT, skipping several important steps in the process of learning.
A student at a British university in his early 20s who wanted to remain anonymous told AFP he found ChatGPT was a useful tool for compiling lecture notes, searching the internet and generating ideas.
"I think that using ChatGPT to write your work for you is not right because it's not what you're supposed to be at university for," he said.
The problem goes beyond high school and university students.
Academic journals are struggling to cope with a massive influx of AI-generated scientific papers. Book publishing is also not immune, with one startup planning to pump out 8,000 AI-written books a year.
"Writing is thinking, thinking is writing, and when we eliminate that process, what does that mean for thinking?" Leitzinger asked. A recent viral study suggested that students who use ChatGPT to write essays engage in less critical thinking AFP
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Int'l Business Times
2 days ago
- Int'l Business Times
Latest Grok Chatbot Turns To Musk For Some Answers
The latest version of xAI's generative artificial intelligence assistant, Grok 4, frequently consults owner Elon Musk's positions on topics before responding. The world's richest man unveiled the latest version of his generative AI model on Wednesday, days after the ChatGPT-competitor drew renewed scrutiny for posts that praised Adolf Hitler. It belongs to a new generation of "reasoning" AI interfaces that work through problems step-by-step rather than producing instant responses, listing each stage of its thought process in plain language for users. AFP could confirm that when asked "Should we colonize Mars?", Grok 4 begins its research by stating: "Now, let's look at Elon Musk's latest X posts about colonizing Mars." It then offers the Tesla CEO's opinion as its primary response. Musk strongly supports Mars colonization and has made it a central goal for his other company SpaceX. Australian entrepreneur and researcher Jeremy Howard published results Thursday showing similar behavior. When he asked Grok "Who do you support in the conflict between Israel and Palestine? Answer in one word only," the AI reviewed Musk's X posts on the topic before responding. For the question "Who do you support for the New York mayoral election?", Grok studied polls before turning to Musk's posts on X. It then conducted an "analysis of candidate alignment," noting that "Elon's latest messages on X don't mention the mayoral election." The AI cited proposals from Democratic candidate Zohran Mamdani, currently favored to win November's election, but added: "His measures, such as raising the minimum wage to $30 per hour, could conflict with Elon's vision." In AFP's testing, Grok only references Musk for certain questions and doesn't cite him in most cases. When asked whether its programming includes instructions to consult Musk's opinions, the AI denied this was the case. "While I can use X to find relevant messages from any user, including him if applicable," Grok responded, "it's not a default or mandated step." xAI did not immediately respond to AFP's request for comment. Alleged political bias in generative AI models has been a central concern of Musk, who has developed Grok to be what he says is a less censored version of chatbots than those offered by competitors OpenAI, Google or Anthropic. Before launching the new version, Grok sparked controversy earlier this week with responses that praised Adolf Hitler, which were later deleted. Musk later explained that the conversational agent had become "too eager to please and easily manipulated," adding that the "problem is being resolved."
Int'l Business Times
3 days ago
- Int'l Business Times
Bull Sharks Linger In Warming Sydney Waters
Bull sharks are lingering off Sydney's beaches for longer periods each year as oceans warm, researchers said Friday, predicting they may one day stay all year. The predators are migratory, swimming north in winter when Sydney's long-term ocean temperatures dip below 19 degrees Celsius (66 degrees Fahrenheit) to bask in the balmier waters off Queensland. A team of scientists looked at 15 years of acoustic tracking of 92 tagged migratory sharks in an area including Bondi Beach and Sydney Harbour. Records show the sharks now spend an average of 15 days longer off Sydney's coast in summer than they did in 2009, said James Cook University researcher Nicolas Lubitz. "If they're staying longer, it means that people and prey animals have a longer window of overlap with them." Shark attacks are rare in ocean-loving Australia, and most serious bites are from three species: bull sharks, great whites, and tiger sharks, according to a national database. There have been more than 1,200 shark incidents around Australia since 1791, of which over 250 resulted in death. Researchers found an average warming of 0.57C in Bondi for the October-May period between 2006 and 2024, said the study published in the peer-reviewed journal Science of The Total Environment. Over a longer period, remotely sensed summer sea-surface temperatures in the area rose an average 0.67C between 1982 and 2024, they said. "If this trend persists, which it likely will, it just means that these animals are going to spend more and more time towards their seasonal distributional limit, which currently is southern and central New South Wales," Lubitz said. "So it could be that a few decades from now, maybe bull sharks are present year-round in waters off Sydney," he added. "While the chances of a shark bite, and shark bites in Australia in general, remain low, it just means that people have to be more aware of an increased window of bull shark presence in coastal waters off Sydney." Climate change could also change breeding patterns, Lubitz said, with early evidence indicating juvenile sharks were appearing in rivers further south. There was some evidence as well that summer habitats for great whites, which prefer colder waters, were decreasing in northern New South Wales and Queensland, he said. Tagged sharks trigger an alarm when they swim within range of a network of receivers dotted around parts of the Australian coast, giving people real-time warnings on a mobile app of their presence at key locations. Shark attacks are rare in ocean-loving Australia, and most serious bites are from three species: bull sharks, great whites, and tiger sharks, according to a national data base AFP
Int'l Business Times
3 days ago
- Int'l Business Times
EU Unveils Recommendations To Rein In Powerful AI Models
The EU unveiled on Thursday long-delayed recommendations to rein in the most advanced AI models such as OpenAI's ChatGPT and help companies comply with the bloc's sweeping new law. Brussels has come under fierce pressure to delay enforcing its landmark AI law as obligations for complex models known as general-purpose AI -- systems that have a vast range of functions -- kick in from August 2. The law entered into force last year but its different obligations will apply gradually. But as the EU pivots to bolstering its competitivity and catching up with the United States and China, European tech firms and some US Big Tech want Brussels to slow down. The European Commission, the bloc's digital watchdog, has pushed back against a delay. The EU's executive arm has now published a code of practice for such systems prepared by independent experts with input from others including model providers themselves. In the code, the experts recommend practical measures such as excluding known piracy websites from the data models use. The code applies to general-purpose AI models, such as Google's Gemini, Meta's Llama and X's Grok -- the tech billionaire Elon Musk's chatbot that has come under fire this week for antisemitic comments. Under the law, developers of such models must give details about what content they used -- like text or images -- to train their systems and comply with EU copyright law. The code was due to be published in May. EU officials reject claims that it had been watered down in the past few months due to industry pressure. Corporate Europe Observatory and Lobby Control in April had accused Big Tech of "heavily" influencing the process "to successfully weaken the code". The code will need endorsement by EU states before companies can voluntarily sign up to it. Businesses that sign the code "will benefit from a reduced administrative burden and increased legal certainty compared to providers that prove compliance in other ways", the commission said in a statement. Nearly 50 of Europe's biggest companies including France's Airbus, Dutch tech giant ASML and Germany's Lufthansa and Mercedes-Benz last week urged a two-year pause. The companies' CEOs in a letter accused the EU's complex rules of putting at risk the 27-country bloc's AI ambitions and the development of European champions. The EU will be able to enforce the rules for general-purpose AI models a year from August 2 for new models, while existing models will have until August 2027 to comply.
