What do other academic writers think about ChatGPT / AI?

After a long absence in here, I wanted to check to see what other academic writers were thinking about ChatGPT. It sure didn't take long to get attacked: "You aren't worth the time anyway" -- good grief, you don't even know me and I'm a fine fellow. Haters gonna hate. I'll be back in a few years if I'm still alive and the next big thing comes along. Good luck everyone.

Thanks for the support in those other threads, PV...much appreciated, obviously. I've seen one or two ChatGPT essays from clients who tried (unsuccessfully) to use it for their projects. It's deceptive for a couple of different reasons: (1) because it can compose convincing text for very simple questions and tasks; and (2) what it produces for more complex essays might sound pretty good to someone who doesn't write very well or understand what's expected from an analytical essay and/or who doesn't bother to check its content for factual accuracy. From what I've seen, if you try to use it for a topic that requires any real thought or more complex analytical reasoning, such as a comparison of Locke and Hobbes, virtually all of it will be about the most basic biographical facts about each of them, and only the simplest imaginable outline of their respective major ideas, but without any kind of analytical comparison, at all. To an inexperienced student who has trouble composing any kind of essay on the topic, in the first place, it might indeed look like it's a decent essay; but anything it produces on that kind of topic will get completely trashed by any professor grading the essay. The other two major issues that I've seen are that some of the information that it generates is factually inaccurate, altogether, and some of the sources it provides are either unrelated to the corresponding point in the essay or completely nonexistent. Granted, these types of programs will only continue to improve; but I highly doubt that any of them will be able to match any genuine human writing for anything more complex than emails, notes, and maybe the very simplest kinds of essays that might be expected of a grade-school student.

The AI does not have the potential to be a serious threat to the academic writers at this point, but it is fast getting to that possibility since the students are become more and more comfortable with using the program, which learns based upon the information given by the millions of students out there. Even the paid version of the program does not seem to deter them from continuing to use the AI. They do not fear the school threats about failing them in courses when they are found out to be using the system. Just like with hiring academic writers, the students will eventually learn to use the AI in a manner that will keep them protected from academic dishonesty problems.

As a former academic writer, I believe that ChatGPT and its conterparts is the way of the future. Human writers will still have their niche in academic writing but will have to compete with the value and security that creating papers using ChatGPT offers them. No threats of blackmail, no threats of exposure, just the need to actually apply a little writing themselves to remove the computer generated language and writing tone. The final reason they will use it more than human writers? It will only cost them $20 a month to create their papers. Now that, as any student would tell you, is value for money, even if they have to put in some elbow grease themselves.

Please keep the discussion on topic without personal attacks, thank you.

Thank you. Just so readers are clear, this was a note added by Admin in conjunction with removing Noted's paragraph-length personal attack; it's certainly not Noted discouraging personal attacks. Admin just forgot to use their red font, by which they usually identify all of their own edits to posts.

@FreelanceWriter
I didn't need an explanation. Had I needed one, I would have contacted Admin.

Looks like the emperor's new clothes to me. There's also too much legwork implied in having to fix the computer's tone and word choice. Students pay to avoid work, not to have to do more of it.

Most students will just discover for themselves how bad these AI essays really are the first time they try to submit one for a grade.

Hey, PV. Great to see you back here, again.

Students are now routinely getting caught for using AI instead of writing their essays. This really shouldn't be a big surprise, because it's even easier to spot and prove than traditional plagiarism, and without the need to subscribe to any proprietary platforms such as turnitin.com to identify specific sources of plagiarized material. Dedicated AI-detection software is also already available, but it isn't really even necessary to use it. All that a professor has to do is take the same essay prompt that he assigns to students and submit the prompt to some of the most popular AI programs, himself, to see exactly what it's going to generate when students try to use AI for their essays. Another risk that should be obvious to students is that if several students use AI for the same prompt (or for portions of it), they're all going to be submitting very similar essays. Here are just a few recent examples:

College professors are in 'full-on crisis mode' as they catch one 'ChatGPT plagiarist' after another
https://fortune.com/2023/08/10/chatpgt-cheating-plagarism-college-professors-full-on-crisis-mode/

First known student caught using ChatGPT at UK university - here's how they were exposed
https://thetab.com/uk/2023/05/15/first-known-student-caught-using-chatgpt-at-uk-university-heres-how-they-were-exposed-308295

My students are using AI to cheat. Here's why it's a teachable moment
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2023/may/18/ai-cheating-teaching-chatgpt-students-college-university

Students Caught Cheating Using AI on Final; Academic Integrity Policy Updated
https://yucommentator.org/2023/01/students-caught-cheating-using-ai-on-final-academic-integrity-policy-updated/

A local teacher caught her students using AI for essays. Now, it's become a learning tool
https://www.hawaiipublicradio.org/local-news/2023-05-08/a-local-teacher-caught-her-students-using-ai-for-essays-now-its-become-a-learning-tool

Interesting and somewhat predictable response above from writers who rightly feel threatened by AI.

An American point of view

"I do think it's important for us to start thinking about the ways that [AI] is changing writing and how we respond to that in our assignments -- that includes some collaboration with AI," Annette Vee, associate professor of English and director of the Composition Program at the University of Pittsburgh, told us.

"The onus now is on writing teachers to figure out how to get to the same kinds of goals that we've always had about using writing to learn. That includes students engaging with ideas, teaching them how to formulate thoughts, how to communicate clearly or creatively. I think all of those things can be done with AI systems, but they'll be done differently."

The line between using AI as a collaborative tool or a way to cheat, however, is blurry. None of the academics teaching writing who spoke to The Register thought students should be banned from using AI software. "Writing is fundamentally shaped by technology," Vee said.

In the UK there is a more pragmatic viewpoint.

It has been described as "a gamechanger" that will prove a challenge in universities and schools. Michael Draper, professor in legal education at the University of Swansea and an expert on academic integrity and cheating. He said universities could try to ban it, as they ban other forms of cheating like essay mills, which students pay to produce an original piece of work that they then submit. Draper said: "The other alternative is that you allow students to use it. lf we're preparing students for the outside world of work and if in the workplace this sort of technology is given to us, then I think we need to embrace it rather than ban it."

Michael Webb, the director of technology and analytics at Jisc, which provides network and IT services to higher education, agreed. He said: "The knee-jerk reaction might be to block these tools in order to stop students cheating, but that's neither feasible nor advisable. We should really regard them as simply the next step up from spelling or grammar checkers: technology that can make everyone's life easier.