More fun with ChatGPT

Nearly every time I use ChatGPT I come away amazed at its capabilities. Many others have noted ChatGPT's limitations, and they are significant. But that said, check out the prompts I gave it recently (I have not included the responses from ChatGPT for space considerations, but also so you, dear reader, could experience the joy I did when seeing the magic happen right before your very eyes).

I gave ChatGPT just the abstract of an article and these prompts:

• write an informal blog, this time including the catchy title, an interest-generating or attention-grabbing opening, a section to introduce and define the topic you will address, a section with example that clarifies and illustrates the topic that you are presenting, and brief statement that ties together the topic and invites the reader to think about it further. make it 500 words long 
• what profession would benefit from knowing about this article? 
• write a formal letter to a social worker about this article, including suggestions for how they could apply this information in their profession

I co-teach a Psychology of Acting class. Check out these prompts:

• write three scenarios that demonstrate the power of eye contact in theater
• what are the best ways for actors to learn their lines
• what the best ways for actors to get inside the role they are playing
• what are the major theories of acting, and provide examples of famous actors for each theory
• what are the hardest challenges for new actors, and how can they overcome them?

I can't claim that ChatGPT's responses to every prompt were scintillating or even correct. But as a starting place they were fantastic. In one class I really do suggest that students write letters to actual people who the students think would benefit from the information in articles they find. They often struggle with this task. But if ChatGPT can give them at least a first draft of a letter, they should be able to revise, tailor, and strengthen the letter with less difficulty. What if students became adept or proficient or even mastered this type of communication with the aid of ChatGPT? Then the real purpose of the activity could shift from developing those skills to affecting the real world. 

Imagine if AI could help us add more meaning to our assessments. Certainly a better outcome for incorporating AI into education than many others I've recently read about.

VERY short blog about assessment

 I just saw this tweet:

Finally set down on paper why I think "collaborative grading" is a clearer, more accurate term than #ungrading for the practice that involves students proposing their own grades using evidence from their work and meeting w/instructors to discuss. pic.twitter.com/iDC08wfyv3

— Joshua Eyler (@joshua_r_eyler) January 10, 2023

My intention is to us collaborative grading instead of "ungrading" when describing my practice to students and colleagues. Soooo much better because collaborative grading captures the dynamic more clearly -- I will work with students to determine their grade. Collaborative grading also establishes from the get-go a more equal relationship between instructor and student. No one really knows what ungrading means until you explain it (and sometimes not even then).

Now I just have to decide if I will re-do my syllabi for this spring semester.

[HT to Robert Talbert for encouraging this Captain's log...]

Another blog about ChatGPT

I bet you are already aware of ChatGPT. I've been watching the posts, tweets, freakouts about it over the holiday vacation. (Here's a great resource about ChatGPT, HT to Bryan Alexander https://bryanalexander.org/future-of-education/resources-for-exploring-chatgpt-and-higher-education/) I finally started playing around with it. I started by asking ChatGPT to summarize an online article, then write a series of tweets about the article, then write a sonnet(!) about the article. It did all three tasks more than adequately. BTW, all I had to do was paste in the link to the article, not the entire article itself.

The article I asked ChatGPT to summarize was from Boston Review. I wondered if ChatGPT could summarize journal articles just by including the DOI in my request. No deal. It told me:

I'm sorry, but I am unable to access or summarize specific articles as my training data only goes up until 2021, and I do not have browsing capabilities. Is there anything else I may be able to help with?

Anyone know how to get it to summarize journal articles?

Then I decided to turn to asking ChatGPT to describe something without giving it a source. I simply asked it to "describe what ungrading is". Here's what it said:

Ungrading, also known as alternative grading or competency-based grading, is a teaching and assessment approach that focuses on students demonstrating their understanding and mastery of material rather than on traditional grading systems that rely on grades, such as A, B, C, etc. In an ungrading system, students are given the opportunity to demonstrate their knowledge and skills through various forms of assessment, such as projects, presentations, essays, or exams, and they are given feedback and guidance along the way to help them progress and improve.

Ungrading can be implemented in a variety of ways, depending on the goals and context of the course or program. Some common features of ungrading include:

• - A focus on learning and mastery rather than grades
• - Multiple opportunities for students to demonstrate their understanding
• - Individualized feedback and support to help students improve
• - A flexible and personalized approach to assessment
• - An emphasis on self-assessment and self-directed learning

Overall, ungrading is designed to provide a more holistic and learner-centered approach to education, allowing students to progress at their own pace and focus on their own learning goals.

This certainly gets the gist of ungrading correct, and remember my request was very basic. So I went further: write a description of ungrading as if you are explaining it to a student.

Ungrading is a different way of thinking about grades and assessment in school. Instead of earning grades like A, B, C, or D, you will be working towards demonstrating your understanding and mastery of the material. This means that you will have multiple opportunities to show what you know and can do, through things like projects, presentations, essays, or exams.

One of the key features of ungrading is that it is flexible and personalized. This means that you will have some control over how you demonstrate your learning and can choose the approaches that work best for you. You will also receive regular feedback and support along the way to help you understand what you need to do to improve.

In an ungrading system, the focus is on learning and growth, rather than just getting a good grade. This means that you have the chance to take your time and really understand the material, rather than just trying to get the right answer on a test. It also means that you will have to take more responsibility for your own learning, by setting goals and working towards them independently.

Overall, ungrading is designed to provide a more engaging and meaningful learning experience for students. It allows you to focus on what you are interested in and what you want to learn, rather than just trying to get good grades. So, it's a different way of thinking about school, but it can be very rewarding if you are willing to put in the effort and take control of your own learning.

This is pretty great. I would consider using this as a first draft for my syllabus. 

What about something a bit more sophisticated? "What does ungrading have in comon with self-determination theory?" [yes, ChatGPT can deal with typos.]

Ungrading and self-determination theory (SDT) are both approaches that focus on supporting individuals' autonomy and agency in their learning and development.

SDT is a psychological theory that explains how people's sense of autonomy, competence, and relatedness influence their motivation and well-being. According to SDT, people are more likely to be motivated and engaged when they feel that they have control over their own lives and are able to pursue their own goals and interests.

Ungrading is a teaching and assessment approach that aligns with these principles by giving students the opportunity to demonstrate their understanding and mastery of material in ways that are meaningful and relevant to them. It also emphasizes individualized feedback and support to help students progress and improve at their own pace.

Overall, both ungrading and SDT recognize the importance of supporting individuals' autonomy and agency in their learning and development, and both approaches seek to provide a more personalized and learner-centered approach to education.

Going for broke here: "describe a college course that combines ungrading, self-determination theory, problem-based learning, and wicked problems and is about climate change"  

A college course on climate change that combines ungrading, self-determination theory, problem-based learning, and wicked problems could be structured as follows:

• Course Description: This course will explore the causes and impacts of climate change, as well as strategies for addressing and mitigating its effects. Students will work on real-world problems related to climate change, using a problem-based learning approach and applying their knowledge and skills to find creative and innovative solutions. The course will also use an ungrading approach, giving students multiple opportunities to demonstrate their understanding and mastery of the material and allowing them to take control of their own learning.

•  

  Learning Outcomes: By the end of the course, students will be able to:

1. Understand the causes and impacts of climate change, including the scientific evidence and the social and economic consequences.
2. Analyze the challenges and opportunities associated with addressing climate change, including the role of technology, policy, and behavior change.
3. Identify and evaluate strategies for mitigating and adapting to climate change, including at the individual, community, and global levels.
4. Develop and defend their own position on a specific aspect of climate change, using evidence-based arguments and critical thinking skills.
5. Work effectively in teams to research and solve complex problems related to climate change, using a problem-based learning approach.

• Course Structure: The course will be structured around a series of wicked problems related to climate change, which students will work on in small groups using a problem-based learning approach. Each problem will be open-ended and complex, requiring students to apply their knowledge and skills to find creative solutions. The course will also incorporate principles from self-determination theory, creating a learning environment that supports students' autonomy and allows them to pursue their own goals and interests.

   

• Assessment: Assessment in the course will be based on an ungrading approach, with students given multiple opportunities to demonstrate their understanding and mastery of the material. This may include projects, presentations, essays, exams, or other forms of assessment, depending on the goals and objectives of the course. Students will also be given regular feedback and support along the way to help them progress and improve.

Still lots of details to work out if this course were to be actually delivered, but the structure, scope, and especially Learning Outcomes, could all satisfy various committees, IMO.

Generally, I have been less concerned about AI and ChatGPT replacing me. I thought that AI would certainly become assistants or tools for professors and many others. I still think that will happen. But I suspect that OpenAI (and others) already have a better version than ChatGPT, and that the rate of improvement might well outpace Moore's Law. How long before the student becomes the master?

"What is truth"

I propose the following question as a final exam for any graduate of the liberal arts, and probably anyone with a college degree:

Name as many disciplines as you can that have an established literature that addresses the question "What is truth?"

• The more disciplines you name, the more points you get
• More points if you can describe the content of the literature
• The more detail you can provide, the more points you get
  
• If you don't know the literature, you can hypothesize what the literature would be about
• More points if your hypothesized literature matches what experts in the discipline report
• More points if members of the discipline had not thought of your ideas but agree that they are worth pursuing

Maximum score answer: detailed description of the literature addressing this question from every discipline ever invented.

Truth is not just a topic of interest to philosophers, but to every discipline (prove me wrong!), and the truly interdisciplinarity (or trans- or pan- or uni-disciplinarity) of the nature of truth is a vital insight. But where in our curricula would students learn this idea? Perhaps in an upper-level philosophy course, or if they happen to piece it together from all the courses they take. How would graduates from your institution do on this final exam?

If you agree with me that the universality of this question is important for students (people) to understand on a deep level, where should this topic exist in our curricula? For me the only answer is General Education. The hard part is figuring out where to put it -- in an existing course? In a new, stand-alone course? In every course? 

 

Thoughts?

A first step towards ungrading

 

I’ve spoken with many educators curious about ungrading but unsure of how to begin. What follows is my best suggestion for how to begin, not based on how I started my own journey to Full Monty Ungrading, but based on what I think is a reasonable way to start given my experiences.

One of the most meaningful aspects of ungrading is the reflection students engage in. Before I ungraded my courses (i.e., for most of my career) I did not ask students to reflect on their learning, benefits, or process at all. That was a huge omission on my part. Plenty of SoTL research demonstrates the benefits of this type of metacognition. Those benefits accrue both to students and instructors. Students gain appreciation for how they’ve changed because of their engagement in a course and they can alter their process if they recognize its limitations. Instructors gain insights into students’ process and challenges. Reflection is a win for all.

In my courses students reflect on their progress and process when they propose their midterm and final grades. I suggest that students do more than just propose the letter grade that my university requires I submit. I suggest that they reflect on their progress towards the SLOs in the course, the strengths and limitations of their learning process, and discuss what outside (of the course) factors played a role in their engagement in our course. Sometimes I have them write this up as a small paper, other times I have students complete a form with a series of prompts. Whatever the format, these student submissions are always the most insightful and rewarding student work I read all year. Just a joy to read.

My proposal is that instructors could simply add the grade proposal as an additional activity for their course, keeping everything else the same as it was before. All the same activities, assignments, grades, points, scores, etc., just add the midterm and final grade reflection and grade proposal. Instructors could even inform students what grade they would receive based entirely on the traditional calculation of the points/scores, but giving students the option to propose a different grade based on their reflections. The instructor could retain the power to submit the proposed grade or the calculated grade.

This first step on the path to ungrading has the clear benefit of not requiring any changes to existing course design, activities, or grade calculation. This can also work in any type of class: STEM, lab, composition, skill-based, lecture, seminar, independent study, you name it. Yes, reading the grade proposals adds work for students and instructors. But reflecting helps students, helps instructors, and deepens the connections between students and instructors. Just do it.

Ungrading and academic integrity

Don’t call a threat an opportunity

Don’t call it integrity when you really mean compliance

My university has an academic integrity policy, and who could argue against integrity? If only the policy was really about integrity. Instead, the policy is really about rules, and the consequences of violations of those rules. It indicates that faculty are obligated to initiate a process when they detect student conduct that runs afoul of those rules. The process starts with faculty confronting students with evidence of their violation(s) and can culminate with a hearing and potentially the student’s dismissal. Faculty were recently informed that should the student retain counsel for that hearing that the university would provide counsel for the faculty.

I don’t see much emphasis on integrity in this policy. To be clear, I think our academic integrity policy is fair and clear. But it really is a compliance policy, or perhaps a punishment policy, not an integrity policy. The few times when I’ve engaged with the process I have found it distasteful and without benefit to student or faculty. There was no examination of the context of the behavior in question. The only thing the students learned was that I (and the university) was their adversary.

Considerable scholarship exists about academic cheating, and the topic has gained attention during the pivot to online instruction as a result of the pandemic. Software that locks down browsers, facial recognition, eye tracking; we’ve sacrificed privacy on the alter of rigor, and trusting students has never been an option.

In my opinion students cheat for one of three reasons (or some combination): students don’t see the value in doing the work, or they don’t believe they can achieve that value if they do the work required of them, or they don’t know how to complete the work. Students cheat because they see the work as busy work, work that has no value. My students aren’t lazy. They have jobs in addition to school, they have family obligations, they have financial concerns that sometimes include housing and food insecurity. They also binge watch entertainment and play video games for hours on end. They have the ability to pay attention when their circumstances and their interests allow it.

The solution to cheating is to address the motivation to cheat, not the consequences of cheating. Why would students cheat if they believed in the value (benefit) of the work, believed the work would produce the benefit, and believed they could complete the work? Our job as faculty is convince students of the first two ideas and help them with the third. And then we trust students to act in their own self-interest.

The problem with general education courses

I continue to believe that the most significant barriers to improving (most) general education courses is the requirement to cover certain content and the mindset that students must “master” that content. Both ideas are harmful illusions. I know that in Intro to Psychology it is impossible for me to in any way adequately cover the full range of possible topics, and it is impossible for students to master any one of those topics. These two ideas restrict the pedagogy I use. I am forced to try to cover every major idea in psychology, no matter how relevant to my students’ lives, and I must move at such a fast pace that depth in any area is impossible. It’s like learning about geology by looking out the window of a car traveling 90 mph.

If content coverage and mastery are not realistic goals, then what are the achievable goals for general education courses? I would propose these two:

• Students’ lives are improved after class is over
• Students want to learn more about topic/discipline after class is over

The first goal reflects the goal that we all have for general education courses. The philosophy of a liberal education is that it improves students’ lives to know something about art and anthropology, and cultures and chemistry, and math and music. The main job of general education instructors is to figure out how their course can improve students’ lives, and then convince students of this fact.

The second goal reflects the impossibility of content coverage and mastery, and puts the emphasis on continual or life-long learning. Since they will not be trying to master the content they are free to explore the ideas they find the most fascinating. Students will ideally want to explore these ideas long after the course is over. Information is now free to access and abundant. What citizens need are better information search skills and filters. If we give students those skills they will be able to pay attention to reliable and valid sources to pursue their professional and personal goals.

What students need is to discover the disciplines represented in general education and how those disciplines can improve their lives.