ChatGPT started to make headlines across the world after its launch in November 2022, with people across South Africa, especially students, using it to generate essays and assignments.
Called a chatbot, or conversational artificial intelligence (AI) system that uses the generative pre-trained transformer (GPT) algorithm, the app has since gone through various upgrades and improvements, and the latest version is known as GPT-4, which can be downloaded from all play stores for a subscription fee.
Breederiver Gazette reached out to Professor Lindy Heinecken, Vice-Dean of Social Sciences at Stellenbosch University (SU) about the advantages and disadvantages of ChatGPT on tertiary education in the social sciences.
What is ChatGPT (answer generated by ChatGPT):
The GPT algorithm used by the app, developed by OpenAI, a North American company, is a type of deep learning model that has been trained on vast amounts of text data, allowing it to generate human-like responses to natural language input. The chatbot’s systems are designed to engage in natural language conversations with users and providing personalised responses based on the input provided.
One academic article, by Jürgen Rudolph, a Singaporean researcher, says these systems can be used for a variety of purposes, including writing narratives, generating computer code, auto-completing images, translating languages, and performing calculations
Positive attributes to tertiary education
According to Heinecken, ChatGPT poses both negative and positive attributes, such as augmenting essays and assignments by creating general outlines and facts on a certain topic as well as serving as a writing assistant, similar to the app Grammarly.
Besides these advantages, it also increases a university- or school student’s general knowledge of a topic without endlessly sifting through information on the internet, but rather by asking the chatbot one question and getting an answer straight away.
Disadvantages to tertiary education
Besides its advantages specifically to tertiary education, this AI chatbot nonetheless poses a threat to tertiary institutions and its students.
In a telephonic conversation, Heinecken explained that among the biggest disadvantages are the minimising of critical thinking, problem solving, coherent argumentation and reflection skills students usually build on when completing university assignments.
Another negative implication is that the work generated by a student would not be their own, which would imply plagiarism where disciplinary action would be taken against the student, as ChatGPT can be detected through plagiarism programmes such as Turnitin.
Another disadvantage this chatbot holds, not necessarily on students, but on their lecturers, is that a substantial increase in time goes into releasing assignments and tests that side-steps the use of ChatGPT.
According Heinecken, SU’s Social Sciences faculty had to adopt several strategies to circumvent the use of this chatbot, ensuring students still practised critical thinking, problem solving, coherent argumentation and reflection skills.
This includes asking detailed and localised questions, which does not accept general answers as ChatGPT will produce.
An example of such a question would be to ask “what civil society in South Africa can do to limit corruption at Eskom”, rather than asking “what can civil society do to limit corruption” according to Heinecken.
With both of these questions ChatGPT will generate answers, with the first one being personalised to a certain degree, while the second answer will be generalised.
However, Heinecken stressed that the first answer will still not be specific enough to obtain substantial marks for it.
Besides adopting this strategy another that the SU’s social sciences asks students is to incorporate ChatGPT into a certain part of an assignment, while another involves critical thinking from the student.
