Artificial Intelligence+Replacement

Places on the Culturesmith site where this pattern has been used as a tag, connecting it to other ideas:

Please sign in to join in our discussion, read an uploaded document, original writing, research, or an existing page on this site which gives a sense of this pattern.

https://duckduckgo.com/?q=using+technology+too+early+or+at+inappropriate+times+weakens+your+mind&t=newext&atb=v354-1&ia=web

https://www.nu.edu/blog/negative-effects-of-technology-on-children-what-can-you-do/

https://wexnermedical.osu.edu/blog/how-internet-affects-your-brain

Brandon WilliamsCraig.....2023-01-24 14:40:58 UTC

https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/chatgpt-passes-mba-exam-wharton-professor-rcna67036

Brandon WilliamsCraig.....2023-01-24 14:47:17 UTC

 
eLearning Strategies
Strategies for Effective eLearning
 
Monthly newsletter
3,152 subscribers

Special Edition - Assessment in the Time of ChatGPT

Joe Seward

Joe Seward

Crazy about eLearning, Serious about Translation and Localization.
 
February 6, 2023

A reader (Roger Taylor) recently asked if I would like to share their research paper titled "Assessment in the Time of ChatGPT." Given the current interest in ChatGPT, many readers may be interested in reading it.


Assessment in the Time of ChatGPT

Roger Taylor, Jeffrey Marzluft

Boston University, Boston, USA. Quincy College, Quincy, USA

Presentation

Poster & Pitch Presentation

Abstract

The recent public release of Open AI’s ChatGPT, with its near human-level writing ability, has been met with excitement and fear in the public. The potential impact of this new technology is also causing controversy in higher education. The responses have ranged from panic (Marche, 2022) to pragmatic (D’Agostino, 2023) to optimistic (Duckworth and Ungar, 2023).

To help the public better understand this complex issue, we conducted an experimental research study in which twenty college faculty members were the participants. The study occurred shortly after ChatGPT was released and none had used it.

Their task was to evaluate responses to an open-ended question about information literacy skills. More specifically, the question asked students to paraphrase a short passage on the sociology of gun control. The responses of 130 students were independently analyzed by two reviewers using a standardized rubric. A subset of the highest rated scores was selected. The same question was given to Open AI’s ChatGPT (version 3.5) and recorded.

Twenty faculty members were independently shown the original question and five responses, one of which was generated by ChatGPT. The faculty indicated which answer they believed was generated by the AI and their reasoning for their decision. A statistical analysis revealed that the faculty did not perform significantly better than chance.

There were two general strategies employed by the faculty members. The first strategy, which was relatively successful, was to identify lower-quality answers (e.g., poor word choice, sentence fragments) as coming from students, then they selected the “best” response as the one coming from the AI. The second strategy, which was relatively unsuccessful, was to choose the answer that seemed “artificial” and didn’t capture the “human” aspect.

Implications for assessment in higher education, both in the short-term and long-term, will be discussed.


Key References

D'Agostino, S. (2023) ‘ChatGPT Advice Academics Can Use Now’, Inside Higher Ed, 12 January.

Deng, J., & Lin, Y. (2023) ‘The benefits and challenges of ChatGPT: an overview’, Frontiers in Computing and Intelligent Systems, 2(2), pp. 81–83.

Duckworth, A. & Ungar, L. (2023), ‘Op-Ed: Don’t ban chatbots in classrooms — use them to change how we teach’, Los Angeles Times, 19 January.

Marche, S. (2022) ‘The college essay is dead: nobody is prepared for how AI will transform academia’, The Atlantic, December.

OpenAI (2023). ChatGPT.

Pham, S. T. H., & Sampson, P. M. (2022) ‘The development of artificial intelligence in education: A review in context’, Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 38(5), pp.1408– 1421.

Brandon WilliamsCraig.....2023-02-08 21:04:20 UTC

A:
https://www.usegalileo.ai/Am I fired? :sob:*On a serious note, this is so scary and impressive, I’m waiting for access but it looks like a great tool for UI conceptualisation.*pretty confident that I’m not fired over this tool and also that AI won’t ever replace humans in user centred design and UX will also forever require human input.
 
Generates delightful UI designs from a text prompt in an instant. Galileo AI combines UI components, images, and content to help you design faster. (507 kB)
 
B:
AI is more likely to kill UI design by removing the need for UI design. Compare the Google search to what it killed (the Yahoo search page)
 
A:
Potentially however to make something based off a single prompt isn't UI design at all. It's layout if anything and really destroys creative opportunity. I personally think, the marketplace may get to a point where it thinks this is a viable option for UI design, however they'll soon go back to human UI designers.This will end up being put in things like site builders, etc.
 
C:
Design targets are shifting. We have been dominated by screen first design for desktops, laptops and lately mobiles. Then we added voice for smart speakers, Alexa, screen readers, etc. We’re adding VR and AR headsets, and soon mixed reality glasses.

 

Brandon WilliamsCraig.....2023-02-09 20:15:40 UTC

https://twitter.com/skirano/status/1635736107949195278?s=20

Pietro Schirano @skirano

I don’t care that it’s not AGI, GPT-4 is an incredible and transformative technology.

I recreated the game of Pong in under 60 seconds.

It was my first try.

Things will never be the same. #gpt4

Brandon WilliamsCraig.....2023-03-15 14:22:18 UTC

 

Relationships with