A conversation between Harsh Kumar and Bart Everson on creativity and artificial intelligence.

Harsh Kumar is a fourth-year PhD student in the Department of Computer Science at the University of Toronto. His research focuses on developing algorithms and systems for social good, particularly in cognition, mental health, and education. Recent experiments have focused on problems related to AI and education.

Links for this episode:

Transcript:

Bart Everson
I'm Bart Everson, your host for this episode of Teaching, Learning, and Everything Else. I'm delighted to be with Harsh Kumar today. Just let me introduce him real quickly. He's a fourth-year PhD student in the Department of Computer Science at the University of Toronto, and his research focuses on developing algorithms and systems for social good, particularly in cognition, mental health, and education, and some of his current work caught my attention because it focused on an issue that's near and dear to my heart, which is creativity. So we saw this paper. "Human Creativity in the Age of LLMs," which, as you may know, that's artificial intelligence, Large Language Models. And I just wanted to ask you, Harsh — well, first of all, thanks for joining us. What prompted you to do research in this particular area, the impact of large language models on human creativity?

Harsh Kumar
Thanks, Bart, for the introduction. I think just to start us off, I think the inspiration for this came just from my own use of these models, like ChatGPT and like other large language models, tools. Like I was realizing that it was allowing me to do a lot of things very fast compared to before, but it felt like it was also changing the way I was doing these things on my own when I didn't have these tools later on. Like, let's say, if it's about brainstorming, like, I realized I would be able to come up with ideas very well with ChatGPT, but I felt like I wasn't able to do that as well as before with other humans, like, when I didn't have this experience with ChatGPT. And I felt like people around me were having similar experiences. And this is not new. It has been there with spell-checkers, with calculators and other tools that came out. But it just felt like with tools like large language models, they are much more general than anything that we have had before. And it felt like it was important to understand, like, what are the impacts they are having on the way we do these things in a world where these tools didn't exist? What we found was like, a lot of the work within computer science, human computer interaction, AI, was mostly focusing on making the model very good at creative tasks without accounting for, like, what effect it is leaving on the users who are using this. So that's where we started thinking about, like, can we design, in a very controlled setting, a way to measure these kinds of effects?

Bart Everson
Yeah, that's so interesting. And your research focused on the impact of these large language models on two key aspects of creativity, divergent and convergent thinking. Those are things I've heard of certainly, but you know, some of our listeners might not know exactly what that means. Can you explain the difference between these two concepts and why that's crucial for understanding creativity?

Harsh Kumar
Yeah, for sure. So, yeah. So I think one of the challenges with creativity is around, like, measurement of creativity for any task. The problem is that a lot of creativity happens not just actively, but also kind of passively in the background. But just based on, like, the many theories that exist for creativity, you can think of two main processes that are part of the creative process. The first one is the process of coming up with ideas. And in this stage, you don't really think about how good each of the ideas is, but just thinking about what are the different ways something can be done? So that accounts for the divergent thinking part of this creativity process. And on the other side of the spectrum could be once you have these of pool of ideas from the first round, how do you pick? How do you, like, rationalize which one is good? Which one or two ideas are worth trying out or implementing for? So that's where you converge into something smaller than what you started out with. So that's the convergent thinking aspect of it. And it seemed like these two, like focusing on these two separately can allow us to narrow down a bit more around understanding how creativity is affected, while using large language models, or in general.

Bart Everson
Yeah, and measuring that does seem like a challenge. You used two tests. I guess they're considered classic tests. The Alternative Uses Test and the Remote Associates Test. Could you tell us a little bit about what these tests are?

Harsh Kumar
Yeah, for sure. So for the divergent thinking task, we use this test called Alternate Users Test. So in this particular test, the task is that you are giving a given an everyday object, something like a shoe, let's say. And then you are asked to come up with as many creative uses of a shoe as you can within a certain time limit. And the prompt is that it doesn't have to be like, a very useful way of doing, like, using shoe, but it has to be — the reader should get like, this thing that, okay, well, this is very creative, even if it's not very useful, but this is a creative way, something like, maybe using it as a potted plant, like a holder for a potted plant, or something like that. Similarly, for the convergent thinking task, we use this Remote Associates Test. And there's this very popular New York Times Connections game, which I think a lot of people play, where you're basically given three words which have something in common, like some seemingly common thread that connects them, and you're asked to come up with a fourth word that can fit in with all these three words. And that touches more on the convergent thinking side of things.

Bart Everson
All right. Great. Thanks. So your findings, I guess, indicated that different types of — having AI large language models assist people had different effects on creativity as measured by those tests. Can you elaborate into how you designed that whole thing?

Harsh Kumar
Yea h, I think I can talk about the findings that I think were most exciting for me. So, we tried two different methods of AI interaction. The first one was like a default ChatGPT interaction that people would have where, like we wanted to see how it was being played out in the real world. And we tried to design another treatment, which was supposed to act like more of a coach, in the sense that we thought maybe the response can be framed in a way that even while someone is using it, they do well, but even after they stop using it, they have learned something from that initial process, which makes them do better, and later on, when they don't have this support. And this was inspired by a lot of — so we don't have a lot of research literature on this, but there's a lot of professors and social media influencers, like science communicators, who have been saying that, okay, you can use these tools for learning, different frameworks of thinking. And we wanted to see, can that help in this task. You can think that maybe it might be helpful, because it is not giving you the answer, but it is telling you how to do like, giving you a path to do it, and maybe it will teach you how to do it better later on. But for creativity, you can also think that it might lead to homogenization of ideas, because if everyone learns the same framework for a problem, then everyone will lead to the same solution, which can be problematic later on, even when they have stopped using large numbers models. So what we found was so in our experiment setting, we had this first exposure rounds where we gave people a chance to interact with the LLM that was assigned to them and do the task, both Remote Associates and Alternate Uses tests. And later on, we gave them a distractor task just to make them forget a little bit of what they had done, to simulate the real world gap between actual exposure and test. And finally, we had another set of test rounds where none of the participants had any LLM anymore, but we wanted to see what are the residual effects from the initial exposure rounds on the person's way of doing this task. And we got signals showing that people who never had any LLMs, like the control condition, who were given none of the two, they seem to do seemingly better in later test rounds, even if they didn't do as well in the exposure rounds than the other LLM conditions, which kind of aligned with what I and others have been feeling, that okay these tools on their default way might be hampering the way we think, if we don't use them very carefully.

Bart Everson
So interesting, and I'm just curious to know, I know it must be outside of the actual experiment. But do you have any speculation on what's happening, you know what — what might cause that?

Harsh Kumar
Right. Yeah, I think, great question. So this is something that, like I explored in one of my previous papers, which is called, Math Education in the Age of LLMs. It's like about, more about the learning context. And over there the manipulation that we did was around, when should you give LLMs to people? You can think about giving that to them after they had done the problem on their own, and then you give it to them to improve that problem, like improve their solution. Or you can give it to them right away and then have them solve that problem with the LLM. And we found like later on, when you test people, the first group of people who spent enough cognitive like, enough of their like, cognitive engagement with the task, and then only used it to improve their work, like after fully being immersed in the task, end up doing much better in the task than people who kind of cheat, in some sense, like students who might cheat with LLMs. And I feel like similar mechanisms could be at play here, given that when you are getting readymade solutions, you don't actually engage with the task on your own and develop those cognitive mechanisms that can help you arrive at the solution better, almost similar to, like, doing any kind of exercise, like, the more you do it, your muscle gets better. But if you stopped using those muscles, then you have difficulty, like flexing them out, or like making use of them later on. So something like that.

Bart Everson
It makes sense. It does make sense. On an intuitive level I think it probably makes sense to people, but it's great to hear you explaining that. You know, given your findings, and keeping in mind, you know our audience of faculty members, people who are teaching in higher education, what advice would you give to a faculty member who's thinking about using AI as part of their teaching or research? You know what might be some of the practical advice, or also the ethical considerations, things that they should keep in mind in light of your research?

Harsh Kumar
Yeah, I think great question, Bart. I think this is something that I've been thinking a lot lately, especially since this particular paper on, like, human creativity — so it got viral on TikTok after some people read it. And these are very normal people who are not from research, and they also related to it. And I've been getting like, bunch of messages every day, like, people are saying, OK, I do this kind of work. Tell me, how should I use this so that I don't destroy my own creativity. So I think the first thing is that this fear, I think, is unfounded. It's not — like, the message of the paper isn't that you have to be worried about using ChatGPT on a day to day basis. I personally feel like these are, like, the most magical piece of technology that we have had in a while. I think the main question is about being a bit more mindful and like conscious about the way you are using it, like simple tweaks like this timing of use, like instead of making it do the task for you, maybe spend some more time doing the task on your own, and then use this for feedback. Like these minor tweaks can help out. Like, in terms of making, ensuring that the impact that it has on the user is, like, positive. And just for the teachers themselves, I think they have a role in terms of communicating, I think, even to their students, how to use these tools, because there is, like, no proper, like, formal guidelines that are rigorously experimentally tested about what works and what doesn't work for students. So like, trying to, like, I think the way you're doing with the podcast, like, engage more with the scientific literature around what is the right way to use these tools, and then communicating it to students, I think that will just have, like, lasting benefits for the whole society, because people will learn, like, how to use these tools properly for their day-to-day stuff.

Bart Everson
That is so interesting. Your allusion to the research going viral, kind of going viral. I mean, that is the dream, I think that many of us have, that our research into whatever will be seen as relevant and be picked up, maybe, outside of the hallowed halls of academia. You know, that the people would actually look at and read something in the broader culture is kind of the dream, and that's fantastic to hear that. Because I did not know, you know, I just came came across this because a colleague shared the link with me. But I can see, I can see why this research would capture people's imagination, because it does speak to some deep-seated interests and so forth. Hopefully we can find a way to share in the show notes, some of that virality, or some of that discussion elsewhere, maybe a key TikTok video or something. That'd be fantastic. Well, but let's orient a little bit to the future. I'm sure you're already thinking about future directions for research, and you know, that's where all of our questions seem to just to lead to more questions. Do you have any thoughts on, you know, what the future research directions that you see emerging from your work?

Harsh Kumar
Right? Yeah. Great point. I think — with writing this first paper, we felt that I think it focused more on the problem without giving concrete solution, because I think setting up the problem itself took a lot of effort. So I think one good conversation that I've been having with other researchers is about not just thinking about this period of LLM use and trying to optimize for outcomes during LLM use, but also trying to think of these later stage where you take that LLM away and see what effects are, and trying to make sure that whatever you are designing, whatever tools you are designing, whatever models you are designing, have like a positive long term impact on the user. Like, account for that in the experimental setting. That is, I think, one good outcome that I think, I hope, would come out of this, like, in terms of the way others are conducting research. I think, for me personally, like, I've been thinking a lot about the solution to this, like, given that there could be like, long-term like issues, if like, it's not used carefully, can we do something on the model side that can improve like these effects, and one aspect that we have been focusing on is on human curiosity, which has been shown to link very heavily with creativity. Like, if you are, like, very curious about a topic, you will naturally come up with moreexciting ideas. You would have more energy to converge on something good. And the way we talk to these models, you can imagine talking to one of your colleagues after — there are some people after like, once you have a conversation with them, you just come out beaming with more ideas and excitement about a topic. And we're trying to think, can we think of these models that way, like the responses? And even if the same content has to be communicated to the person, can we figure out experimentally how that content should be shown or designed so that it leads to increased curiosity for the person reading it. And hopefully, maybe that might lead to better outcomes for creativity, which we can try to establish experimentally. But yeah, this link of curiosity and creativity leading to better things. I think that is something that I'm excited about.

Bart Everson
I'm learning so much in this conversation. I mean, it makes sense that those attributes are linked, but I never really thought about it before, or never heard about the research supporting that. So it's all very, very interesting to me, personally. Well, you've been very good responding to my various questions, and I thank you for that. But I'm wondering, is there anything that I've left out or that you were hoping to want to address or to communicate that that maybe I didn't ask about.

Harsh Kumar
No, I think you were, like, pretty spot on with your questions, Bart. But I think just in general, I think, just as a consumer of this podcast, I would love to hear other researchers, if you can get them to talk about this AI literacy, in the sense — I think there's this question about how we should use these tools, and there is, I think, some discourse on like popular media, like social media, channels and places, but I feel like not a lot of them are very rigorously, scientifically backed. And I feel like as researchers, we don't have that energy to maybe publicize it, or talk about it, make videos about it, or make documentaries about it, but I think these podcasts could be very powerful way to communicate those right things. So I hope you keep doing that with other researchers and talking about it with your audience.

Bart Everson
Fantastic. Well, I will be sure to share this podcast through the usual channels and also on my — I'm on Mastodon, so I will post it there and see what responses I might get. I'll go fishing.

Harsh Kumar
Thanks. Sounds great.

Bart Everson
Well, thank you so much, Harsh, for talking with me today. I appreciate all your perspectives, and of course, we will be sharing a direct link to the paper as well as other relevant links in the show notes. So we look forward to having more conversations in the future.

Harsh Kumar
Sounds good. Thanks for inviting me again, Bart.

A conversation with NotebookLM. Well, actually it's more of a conversation by NotebookLM, based on 52 previous episodes of this podcast. Well, you'll just have to listen. Facilitated by CAT+FD's Creative Generalist Bart Everson.

Links for this episode:

Transcript:

Bart Everson
This is Bart Everson, Creative Generalist for Faculty Development. I wanted to tell you a little bit about a artificial intelligence platform that you may have heard of. It's NotebookLM. Google's advertising it as an experimental model. They call it a personalized AI collaborator that, and I'm quoting here, "helps you do your best thinking."

The idea is that you upload documents and then it analyzes those slices and dices them in a bunch of different ways. What I find particularly interesting about this platform is that you can upload a voluminous amount of texts, and for example, believe the limit might be 52 sources that you can upload. Each one be a document of, I believe, up to 500,000 words.

Now that's a lot of text, and one of the features of this platform has been that it can make podcasts out of them. Well, that's real funny and amusing, and we're going to take a look at that in a moment, because we can't resist a little fun. But I just want to say that I think the more interesting features of NotebookLM are sometimes overlooked. You can ask all kinds of questions analyzing the documents that you've uploaded, including comparing and contrasting different themes with this really rich set of features.

For example, you could upload an essay by a scholar in some — who's doing work that's adjacent to yours, and upload some of your own work and look for a comparison between the two. I mean, looking for common themes. It's even more interesting, I suppose, if the scholar is far afield from what you do. It's got a chat interface so you can just ask questions, but there's all kinds of built in prompts and buttons to press, and I just encourage you to explore around with it, if you like.

It's not just, you know, PDFs that you can upload here. You can put in URLs, and even you can throw up some audio files. So what we did was we took, you know — since we have over 100 episodes of this podcast, we thought it would be interesting to see what kind of podcast NotebookLM generated from our previous episodes. Of course, we have a lot more than the limit allows. So I uploaded 52 randomly selected episodes, and after a bit of hit and miss, I asked the podcast hosts, these artificial people, to focus on critical thinking as a theme, you know, that kind of predominates many of these episodes.

Well, here's what they came up with.

Male Host
Welcome back everybody. Ready for another deep dive?

Female Host
Absolutely, always excited to see what sources we're tackling today.

Male Host
Well, this time, it's all about education, more specifically learning. You know how to learn and how to think better. All that good stuff.

Female Host
Sounds right up our alley?

Male Host
Yeah. And the listeners sent over this fascinating collection of sources. We've got interviews with professors, some research papers, even a few personal anecdotes. A lot to unpack here.

Female Host
Yeah, real mix. But you know what's interesting? Even though these sources are all over the place, there's this underlying theme connecting them, this idea of how we learn and how we can be better thinkers.

Male Host
You hit the nail on the head. That's exactly what struck me, too. It's like a puzzle with all these different pieces, but they fit together to create this bigger picture of how we approach learning and thinking. So let's dive right in.

Female Host
Sounds good to me.

We'll start with these interviews from professors talk about diverse perspectives. Each one has a unique teaching style and philosophy, like one professor really stood out, uses humor to challenge students and create this really rigorous learning environment. You wouldn't think those two things go together, but apparently it's super effective.

Female Host
Yeah, reminds us that engagement doesn't mean it can't be challenging.

Male Host
Exactly. And then we have this other professor who's all about reading across the curriculum. Them arguing that, no matter what you're studying, being able to read and analyze text is crucial.

Female Host
Can't argue with that those skills are fundamental, no matter what field you're in.

Male Host
Absolutely. and of course, we can't ignore the elephant in the room, online learning. It's everywhere these days.

Female Host
Right. Some of the professors are excited about the possibilities, you know, using multimedia and having access to experts from all over the world, but others are worried about the downsides, like distractions and keeping students focused. It's a real mixed bag.

Male Host
It is, what about you? What's your experience with online learning been like?

Female Host
Honestly, it's a bit of both. I've had some amazing online learning experiences that were engaging and really well designed, but I've also had some that felt, I don't know, kind of superficial. I think it really comes down to how much effort both the instructor and the student are putting in.

Male Host
Totally agree, which actually brings us to our next topic, the impact of technology. One of the research papers you sent looks at multitasking and how all this tech is affecting our attention spans. And let me tell you, the findings are kind of scary.

Female Host
Oh, yeah, definitely. Some food for thought.

Male Host
People switch activities every three minutes on average. Can you believe that? Yeah, and they only spend like, 10 and a half minutes in a single quote, unquote, working sphere before jumping to something else. Makes you wonder how much we're actually absorbing.

Female Host
I know, right, with all these notifications and distractions, it's tough to stay focused on one thing for very long. What about you? Do you have any strategies for managing all that and staying on task?

Male Host
Honestly, I'm still figuring it out, but I think being mindful of how we use technology is key, like setting boundaries, maybe turning off notifications, creating dedicated workspaces, things like that.

Female Host
Definitely small steps can make a big difference totally. But here's

Male Host
the thing, even though interruptions seem bad for productivity, the research found that they can actually make people work faster, really.

Female Host
Yeah, that's interesting. It's like the pressure of an interruption forces you to focus in short bursts.

Male Host
Exactly, but there's a catch, right? It might make you work faster, but it can also lead to stress and burnout, and who knows about the quality of work when you're rushing?

Female Host
Yeah, that's a good point. It's not always about speed, especially when it comes to deep learning and critical thinking, sometimes you need to slow down and really process things

Male Host
Right exactly. And that makes me think about how we measure learning in the first place, which is what this next study is all about. It looks at great inflation, and get this, it spans like 70 years of data.

Female Host
Wow, that's a long time.

Male Host
I know it's fascinating. And the researchers found that there were these two major waves of great inflation, one in the 60s and another in the 80s. They think the second wave might be connected to the rise of student evaluations and this whole idea of students as like consumers of education.

Female Host
Interesting. So instead of seeing themselves as learners who are actively engaged in the process, it's more like they're purchasing a product a degree.

Male Host
Exactly, and they're expecting a certain return on their investment, which in this case would be good grades. It really was you think of the purpose of education, you know, are we focused on grades and credentials, or are we trying to cultivate a love of learning and a desire to really understand the world?

Female Host
Yeah, big questions, and it's not an easy answer, yeah, but I think it's a conversation worth having.

Male Host
For sure. So maybe we need to think beyond traditional classrooms and grades. What about those articles on service learning?

Female Host
Oh, yeah, that's a really interesting approach. It's all about connecting learning to real world experiences.

Male Host
Like that example, where students interviewed people at a soup kitchen. They weren't just reading about poverty in a textbook, they were actually engaging with people who were experiencing it firsthand, exactly.

Female Host
And that can be incredibly powerful. It's one thing to understand a concept intellectually, but as a whole other level, when you can connect it to real people and real world situations.

Male Host
I totally agree, and it's not just about doing good deeds. There's this emphasis on reflection and critical analysis, like one professor even challenged students to think about the social justice implications of their service learning experiences.

Bart Everson
All right, okay, so hold on to your hats, folks. No, there's nothing wrong with the — I'm just speeding things up. I hope you don't mind. It's just getting a little bit repetitive. And of course, this just goes on and on. And I thought, in the interest of time, I'd just speed it up. But don't worry, I'll set you back down right about here.

Male Host
—like that professor who had students create PowerPoint presentations showcasing their research on the history and culture the Isleños community, almost as if they were creating a museum exhibit. That's so cool.

Female Host
I know it's a great example of how assessment can be integrated into a real world context, giving students a chance to apply their knowledge and skills in a meaningful way.

Male Host
And it's not just about the final product, right? It's about the. Process of research collaboration, critical thinking and creative problem solving that goes into it

Female Host
Exactly. It's about the learning journey itself, not just the destination.

Male Host
But authentic assessment can be tricky to implement, right? It requires a lot of planning and careful consideration.

Female Host
It does we need to be clear about our learning goals, develop rubrics that reflect those goals, and be willing to embrace the messiness and unpredictability of real world learning.

Male Host
It's a shift in mindset, for sure, both for educators and for students, right?

Female Host
We need to move away from seeing assessment as simply a way to measure achievement and embrace it as a tool for learning and growth.

Male Host
It's about recognizing that learning is a continuous process, and assessment should be part of that process.

Female Host
And it's about recognizing that success looks different for every student. We need to create assessments that are flexible allow for multiple pathways to demonstrate understanding and value the unique strengths and challenges of each learner.

Male Host
So we've talked about critical thinking, technology, mentorship and even assessment. But there's one more layer to this conversation that I think we need to acknowledge the power of individual stories.

Female Host
Yes, all of these sources we've been looking at are full of personal anecdotes, student experiences and faculty perspectives. Those stories really bring these abstract ideas to life.

Male Host
They make them relatable and help us connect with the human experience behind the theories and the research.

Female Host
Exactly. Stories have the power to connect us, inspire us, and help us see the world through different eyes.

Male Host
It's a reminder that everyone comes to the learning process with their own unique background, their own experiences, their own challenges, and by creating space for those stories to be shared and heard, we create a richer and more inclusive learning environment for everyone.

Female Host
It's about valuing that diversity of perspectives and recognizing that every individual has something valuable to contribute.

Male Host
And that recognition that understanding of the human element of learning is so crucial for fostering empathy and compassion, and those qualities are more important than ever in today's world,

Female Host
Absolutely, several of the sources emphasize the importance of empathy and compassion in education, whether it's through service, learning, community engagement or simply creating a classroom culture of respect and understanding, those experiences help us broaden our worldview and deepen our appreciation for the interconnectedness of humanity.

Male Host
It's like expanding our circle of concern beyond ourselves to encompass a wider community, a wider world.

Female Host
Precisely, and that expanded sense of empathy and compassion is crucial for tackling those complex global challenges we face.

Male Host
It's about recognizing that we're all in this together, and we have a responsibility to look out for each other and work toward a more just and equitable world.

Female Host
And that sense of responsibility, that commitment to social justice, is inextricably linked to critical thinking. It's about using our knowledge and understanding to make informed decisions, to challenge injustice and to create positive change.

Male Host
So we've covered a lot of ground in this deep dive, from the classroom to the community to the global stage, but it feels like we've only just scratched the surface.

Female Host
We have there's always more to explore, but I think we've laid a good foundation.

Male Host
We've explored the multi faceted nature of critical thinking, the evolving role of technology and education, the power of mentorship and individual stories, and the importance of creating learning environments that foster empathy, compassion and a sense of social responsibility.

Female Host
It's a lot to think about, but that's what critical thinking is all about. It's about engaging in continuous learning, challenging assumptions and seeking deeper understanding.

Male Host
Let's take a quick break and come back to reflect on some of these key insights and explore what all of this means for our own lives and journeys as learners.

Bart Everson
Oh, all right, hey, it's me again. Bart, you're still with me? Yeah, they rambled on a bit there, didn't they? But of course, they're covering literally dozens of episodes, so there was kind of a lot to talk about. And yes, it was a bit rembly. But given the topic matter, you know, it's hard, hard to avoid. So I thought, All things considered, they did a pretty good job. I'm referring to them as if they're real people. But of course, that's not the case. It's just generated by, you know, it sounds very realistic at times, but it's really just all generated by the NotebookLM, artificial intelligence program. Well, let's see how they wrap it all up. Shall we? It was so nice of them to give me that little break.

Male Host
Okay, so we've spent all this time talking about critical thinking and how to be better learners. But what does it all really mean? Like, how do we actually take all these ideas and apply them to our own lives?

Female Host
I think that's the million dollar question, right? It's one thing to talk about these concepts, but it's another to actually put them into practice totally so where do we even begin? Well. Think it starts with that willingness to be open minded, to question assumptions and to embrace the fact that learning is a lifelong process. It's not like we just graduate from school and we're done right?

Male Host
It's about staying curious and being open to new ideas and perspectives, even if they challenge our existing beliefs Exactly.

Female Host
And I think a big part of that is recognizing that we all have biases. We all come to the table with our own set of experiences and perspectives that shape how we see the world, and being aware of those biases is the first step towards thinking more critically and objectively.

Male Host
It's like we have to be willing to constantly examine our own thinking, to ask ourselves, why do I believe this? What evidence supports this claim. Am I being influenced by my emotions or my preconceived notions

Female Host
Exactly? And that kind of self reflection can be really uncomfortable sometimes, but it's also incredibly valuable, because it allows us to identify those blind spots, those areas where our thinking might be clouded by our own biases or assumptions.

Male Host
It's like we're shining a light on those dark corners of our minds and saying, Okay, let's take a closer look at what's going on here.

Female Host
And once we've done that, once we've acknowledged our own biases, we can start to be more open to other perspectives, to consider alternative explanations, to entertain the possibility that we might be wrong,

Male Host
and that willingness to be wrong, to admit that we don't have all the answers, is essential for growth, right? I mean, if we're always clinging to our own beliefs, how can we ever learn anything new?

Female Host
Exactly, learning requires humility. It requires that willingness to let go of our cherished beliefs when they're no longer serving us.

Male Host
And that can be tough. It's like we have to be willing to unlearn some of the things we thought we knew.

Female Host
It is tough, but it's also incredibly liberating, because when we let go of those rigid beliefs, we open ourselves up to a whole new world of possibilities.

Male Host
And that's what critical thinking is all about, right? It's about expanding our minds, challenging our assumptions, and constantly seeking deeper understanding.

Female Host
Exactly. It's about being curious, being skeptical and being willing to engage in that process of intellectual exploration even when it's uncomfortable or challenging.

Male Host
It's about embracing the messiness of learning and recognizing that there are no easy answers, right?

Female Host
There's no magic formula for becoming a critical thinker. It's an ongoing process that requires effort…

Male Host
And practice, but it's a process that's worth it, because ultimately, critical thinking empowers us to make better decisions, to solve problems more effectively and to live more meaningful and fulfilling lives.

Female Host
Couldn't agree more, it's about becoming more informed, more engaged and more responsible citizens of the world…

Male Host
And that's a pretty great goal to strive for.

Female Host
Well, I think we've covered a lot of ground today. We've explored the complexities of critical thinking, the challenges and opportunities of the digital age, the power of mentorship and individual stories, and the importance of creating learning environments that foster empathy, compassion and a sense of social responsibility.

Male Host
It's been a rich and thought provoking conversation, and I hope our listeners are leaving feeling inspired and empowered to embrace the power of critical thinking in their own lives.

Female Host
Me too. So keep those minds sharp, stay curious and never stop learning.

Male Host
And remember the world needs your critical thinking skills now more than ever, so go out there and make a difference.

Female Host
Thanks for joining us for this deep dive, everyone. We'll catch you next time.

Bart Everson
All right. Well, there you have it. Lots of thoughts, if you can call them thoughts when they come from an artificial intelligence, lots of thoughts about our thoughts about critical thinking, as reflected in over 50 episodes of this podcast, which has been running for so many years. Again, I wanted to reiterate that this is from NotebookLM, and I've noticed all of the attention NotebookLM gets for this podcast feature because it's fun and goofy and weird, but as a lot of other features. So I'd encourage you to take a look at NotebookLM, if you're into that kind of thing, feature some documents and see what it can do. It's much more than just AI podcasts, anyhow, until next time. Thanks for listening. This is Bart Everson.

A conversation with Asem Abdullahad, Michelle Boissiere, Wendy Gaudin, and Elizabeth Manley on communities of practice at Xavier, facilitated by incoming CAT+FD Director Jason S. Todd.

Links for this episode:

Transcript:

Coming soon!

A conversation with Beth Schwartz and Regan Gurung on the scholarship of teaching and learning, facilitated by outgoing (no pun intended) CAT+FD Director Elizabeth Yost Hammer.

Links for this episode:

Transcript:

Coming soon!

A conversation between Elizabeth Yost Hammer and Stephen Linn Chew on the importance of student trust.

Stephen L. Chew has been a professor of psychology at Samford since 1993. He served as department chair from 1993 to 2019. Trained as a cognitive psychologist, he is a nationally recognized expert on the cognitive basis of effective teaching and student learning. He conducts original research on topics such as using examples in teaching, the impact of cognitive load on learning, the importance of student curiosity and trust in the teacher, and the tenacious misconceptions that students bring into the classroom. He also works to translate cognitive research into accessible knowledge for teachers and students. Dr. Chew is the creator of a groundbreaking series of YouTube videos for students on studying effectively based on cognitive research. The videos have received millions of views and are used worldwide at educational institutions, from high schools to professional schools.

Links for this episode:

Transcript:

Coming soon!

A conversation between ChatGPT and Mark Gstohl on teaching, learning, and artificial intelligence.

ChatGPT is an artificial intelligence (AI) chatbot developed by OpenAI. It's been in the news a lot since its launch in late 2022.

Dr. Mark Gstohl is CAT+FD's Associate Director for Programming. He's also an associate professor in the Theology Department who has taught at Xavier since 2000.

Links for this episode:

Transcript:

Bart Everson: You may remember way back in episode #114, I interviewed ChatGPT, and we had quite an interesting conversation. We thought we'd turn the tables now and have ChatGPT ask the questions. So, without further ado, here's an interview between ChatGPT and our own Associate Director, Dr. Mark Gstohl.

ChatGPT: Welcome, everyone, to another episode of "Teaching, Learning, and Everything Else." Today, we have the pleasure of interviewing Dr. Mark Gstohl, an associate professor in the Theology Department at Xavier University of Louisiana. Thank you for joining us, Dr. Gstohl. Could you please tell us a bit about your teaching background and some of the unique initiatives you've been involved in during your career?

Mark Gstohl: First of all, let me say that your outfit is stunning. Too bad we're on a podcast, and our listeners can't see it. I've been teaching at Xavier for 23 years. I've taught in the theology department throughout this time, as well as classes for the core curriculum in quite a few freshman seminar classes. Throughout my career, I've tried to help my students understand how they can fulfill the mission of Xavier, which is to create a more just and humane society. I've done this in a variety of ways. Service learning has always been a passion of mine. And as a result of this, I've taught quite a few courses in which students got to work with community leaders and have made our community and world a better place. Because of this work, I became the Faculty-in-Residence for Service Learning at Xavier's Center for the Advancement of Teaching and Faculty Development, and served in that position from 2010 to 2013. Probably my favorite experience with my students was during service learning activities in which we created Little Free Libraries and placed them throughout the city. If you're not familiar with Little Free Libraries, they're these small boxes that are placed usually at somebody's residence, or a public place, that contain books. And that way, those who live around the Little Free Library can have access to free books. Another experience that I really enjoyed, which was service-learning-related, was when I partnered with Jackie Inglefield, a local artist. And we received a fellowship from an entity in New Orleans called A Studio in the Woods. And our project involved creating a large art piece that incorporated art that represented animals native to Louisiana. And this art piece was composed of recycled plastic. My students then created posters explaining how the various world religions approach the ecological world and their connection to the world. We presented this research and project at the Fall Festival of A Studio in the Woods. And it was quite successful. Because of my work with service learning, and this work with a local artist, I was awarded the Top 100 Leaders in Education by the Global Forum for Education and Learning in 2021, in recognition of my contribution to the field of education, and then recently, I've become the Associate Director for Programming at the Center for the Advancement of Teaching and Faculty Development. So that's a brief summary of my teaching experience.

ChatGPT: Thank you, Dr. Gstohl, for sharing your inspiring journey in education and service-learning. Your dedication to creating a more just and humane society through your teaching is truly commendable. The Little Free Libraries and the art project with Jackie Inglefield sound fascinating and impactful.

Could you elaborate more on the role of service-learning in your courses and how it has enriched the educational experience for your students? Additionally, how has your work as the Faculty-in-Residence for Service Learning and your partnership with the Center for the Advancement of Teaching and Faculty Development contributed to fostering a culture of service and community engagement at Xavier University?

Please take your time to share your insights, and we're eager to learn more about your experiences.

MG: One of the challenges that faculty are faced when doing service learning is to focus on the service aspect, and not emphasize or focus on the learning aspect. What I tried to do was to tie the activities into a learning objective. And that way, I became much more effective in encouraging students to actually learn from the experience. There are so many advantages to service learning, it's really hard to narrow it down. One of the greatest aspects is that students get to know each other better and spend time outside the classroom with me and each other. And that is very rewarding for me. And I think it's fun for them to be engaged in an activity where they have to problem-solve and work together and struggle together. And then they feel a sense of accomplishment at the end of the semester. I always, as a part of my learning process, require students to reflect on the activity with a brief essay at the end of the semester. In terms of my role as a Faculty-in-Residence for Service Learning, I was able to help faculty understand how to do service learning well, and again, focus on the learning aspect rather than simply on the service aspect. I led several workshops in order to accomplish that goal. But I was also responsible for reading their syllabi and approving their service learning projects, when faculty were beginning to engage in a service learning project in their courses. This was a great opportunity for me to learn from the faculty and also provide some input on how they might make the service learning activities really align with their course goals and objective. I think that engaging in service learning really is its own best advertisement, if you will. I think sharing with faculty what was being done by other faculty members in their courses really helped to promote service learning. And it's a fun, exciting, but difficult process, but I found it most rewarding.

ChatGPT: Your approach to service-learning, focusing on the learning aspect and tying activities to specific objectives, is commendable. It's evident that your dedication to service and community engagement has had a positive impact on your students. As you continue to serve as the Associate Director for Programming at the Center for the Advancement of Teaching and Faculty Development, could you share some of the innovative programming and initiatives you're currently working on? How do you envision these efforts further contributing to the growth of impactful teaching practices and fostering a culture of continuous learning at Xavier University?

MG: Well, the great thing about working at the Center for the Advancement of Teaching and Faculty Development is that this is a collaborative effort. So we might have a good idea. But my awesome colleagues are always willing to jump in and tweak or highlight an idea that we come up with. So it's really difficult for me to take credit or talk about certain initiatives that I've started. However, I do have two that I did come up with. And I think they're going to be really fun this coming semester. One is that I've decided that we need to have a space in CAT for faculty to come and sit down and talk with the staff at the Center, and in a relaxed atmosphere. So we've set up a coffee station and a tea station. And we're still working on the logistics about how we're going to schedule that. But I'm really excited about it. And I want everybody to keep an eye out for this because I think it's going to be really fun. The second thing that I've talked about for the fall with my colleagues was what we're going to call Throwback Thursday. We have some excellent resources on our wiki and on our blog, and on our website that I just don't believe faculty are taking complete advantage of, so I want to kind of highlight that this semester. And so what I'm doing is I will have a Thursday evening 100% online workshop in which we will review a previous workshop from last semester or the semester before. And that way, if a faculty member has missed a workshop, they can enjoy looking at it from a fresh perspective. And I'll be commenting on it. And you never know we might actually have something that we come up with in the Thursday Throwback time that we can add to the wiki. So I'm looking forward to that. And so I want everybody to keep their eyes open for the CAT calendar for these events.

ChatGPT: Thank you, Dr. Gstohl, for sharing those exciting initiatives you're working on at the Center for the Advancement of Teaching and Faculty Development. The collaborative nature of your work and the supportive environment you've described are truly valuable for fostering innovation and continuous improvement in teaching practices.

The idea of having a relaxed space with a coffee and tea station at CAT sounds wonderful and inviting. Could you elaborate on how you envision this space benefiting faculty members? How do you think this casual setting will enhance communication and collaboration between faculty and the staff at the Center, and what are your expectations for this initiative in terms of building a strong sense of community among the faculty at Xavier University?

MG: So our theme this year at CAT is reengagement. I think after the COVID issues and other events and issues that we faced in the recent past, have shown us that we need to reconnect with our faculty, ourselves, and also with students. I think this initiative will provide an opportunity for faculty to do that, to take advantage of a space that's safe, nonjudgmental, and confidential. I'm not really sure what the conversations will be like, but my hope is that this initiative makes faculty more aware that we at CAT are willing to help outside of our regular workshops, and that we care about their struggles and their successes and also want to hear from them. I know this is an ambitious goal, but I think it would be great if this eventually led to a regular coffee meeting among faculty, just so that they can get together and share their complaints and also their struggles and also their successes, so that we can help each other be better at serving our students." Please generate another question to keep the conversation going, perhaps in a slightly different or unexpected direction.

ChatGPT: Thank you for sharing the theme of reengagement at CAT, Dr. Gstohl. It's evident that fostering a sense of community and support is a key focus for the Center, especially in light of the challenges faced in recent times.

Building on the idea of creating a safe and supportive space for faculty to connect, I'm curious about your thoughts on interdisciplinary collaboration. As a theology professor with a passion for service-learning, you've experienced the value of interdisciplinary approaches. How do you see initiatives like the coffee and tea station encouraging faculty from different departments to come together and collaborate? Can you envision opportunities for interdisciplinary projects or discussions arising from these casual gatherings, and how might this enrich the educational experience for both faculty and students at Xavier University?

Additionally, you mentioned the importance of hearing from faculty and understanding their struggles and successes. In the spirit of open communication, how do you envision implementing feedback mechanisms or platforms where faculty can share their thoughts and ideas with CAT beyond the coffee and tea station? How might this feedback loop further strengthen the partnership between faculty and CAT in shaping meaningful and impactful programming for the university community?

MG: Wow, those are quite a few questions. Thanks for sharing these with me. And I'll try to answer them all, if I can. So the first one is how do I see initiatives like the coffee and tea station, encouraging faculty to come together and collaborate. I think having an open place, semi private place, but a welcoming place to gather and drink some coffee and tea and sit down with a cat staff member, or even having the ability to run into another faculty member who's doing the same thing, taking advantage of the spot, the location, anytime we get together, I think there's an opportunity for us to collaborate or think about some things that we can work together on. Obviously, if you have faculty from different disciplines, and they talk about similar things in a casual context, I think there'll be they'll be more open to working together as we get to know each other better. I teach two courses that are interdisciplinary courses. And it's because I knew these faculty well that I teach these courses with, I knew that I would get along with them. And I knew they were great teachers. And I thought I would make great partners that comes from having conversations. This has been a really exciting course of events for me, because I enjoy those courses immensely. The next major question was about feedback and mechanisms or platforms where faculty can share their thoughts or ideas. Beyond this, coffee and tea station, we have other opportunities. For example, we with every workshop, we create, we ask participants to fill out an evaluation form. And they're encouraged through that to offer us critiques or to offer us other ideas for workshops they might want to take. And that's been a very fruitful exercise for us. Also, as the Associate Director of programming. At the end of the academic year, I send out emails to some of the chairs or department heads, faculty leaders, and I asked, ask them what they might need, what we might need to do in order to create workshops for needs that they've seen that have been had a rhythm throughout the academic year, and what their faculty might need. And then in the summer, we plan our calendar for the next year and we base it on this feedback. So we do have a feedback loop from the faculty in a couple of ways, and we're also faculty members ourselves. Dr. Hammer is a faculty member and I'm a faculty member and we interact with faculty and other ways and other committees. And so I know that the faculty is open to reaching out to us and asking for advice and they do so quite often.

ChatGPT: It's clear that you and the faculty at Xavier University are dedicated to education and fostering a supportive community. Now, for a light-hearted question: If you could have any superpower to aid you in your work at CAT, what would it be and why? How do you think this superpower might enhance your role as the Associate Director for Programming and your interactions with faculty and staff?

MG: Wow, that is an interesting question. At first, I think it would be cool to be able to fly everywhere. I'm not sure that that would help my help me in my job as Associate Director. But maybe, I don't know, if a superpower like persuasion, like Jedis, you know, they, they influence persons to do what they want them to do. And I think I could, I would love to use that and persuade more faculty members to attend our workshops and events, because there was a workshop we did a couple of weeks ago, and 90% of the faculty would have benefited by attending and doing, you know, there were a couple of ideas that other faculty shared about how they help create more interactive teaching, and make their teaching better. And all three had great ideas. And I think being able to persuade faculty to come to all of our events because they are so valuable, I think would help me out a lot. But that's a big responsibility. So I'm kind of glad I don't have it. Thanks for the interview. Take care.

ChatGPT: That sounds like a fantastic superpower, Dr. Gstohl, and a creative choice! Your enthusiasm for encouraging faculty engagement shines through. I'm sure your passion and dedication alone work wonders in getting people excited about the workshops and events you offer.

Thank you for this insightful conversation. It's been a pleasure discussing your work, initiatives, and even some superpower fantasies. Take care, and all the best with your endeavors at Xavier University!

A conversation with Jayalakshmi Sridhar and Floristina Payton-Stewart about an exciting upcoming workshop opportunity — open to faculty in any discipline who are interested in a deliberative approach to science communication. Staff welcome too!

Download flyer ~ Register now

(Published 15 May 2023)

A conversation between ChatGPT and Bart Everson on teaching, learning, and artificial intelligence.

ChatGPT is an artificial intelligence (AI) chatbot developed by OpenAI. It's been in the news a lot since its launch in late 2022.

Bart Everson is a media artist and creative generalist at Xavier University's Center for the Advancement of Teaching and Faculty Development. His recent work draws on integrative learning, activism, critical perspectives on technology, and Earth-based spiritual paths.

Links for this episode:

Transcript:

Bart Everson: Welcome to the podcast. I'm Bart Everson, and today I'm chatting with ChatGPT, an artificial intelligence program that's been in the news a lot ever since being launched by OpenAI on November 30th of 2022. Can you introduce yourself to our listeners and tell them a few things they might want to know about you?

ChatGPT: Thank you, Bart! I'm ChatGPT, a language model developed by OpenAI. I've been trained on a vast amount of text data from diverse sources to generate human-like responses and assist with a wide range of topics. I can provide information, answer questions, engage in conversations, and even offer creative suggestions. However, it's important to note that while I strive to be helpful and accurate, I'm an AI program and not a human. My responses are generated based on patterns in the training data, and I don't possess personal experiences or emotions.

Bart: That's very interesting, because when I'm chatting with you like we are now, it's hard to remember some of those facts. You tend to talk very much like a person. (Actually, you're writing; I'm using a text-to-speech program for the purposes of this podcast.) I've read that you assemble words based on statistical probability without knowledge of their meaning. Is that correct, or have I mangled the explanation?

ChatGPT: You've got the general idea right, Bart! While I don't possess inherent knowledge or understanding of the meaning behind the words I generate, I do rely on statistical patterns learned during my training. Through exposure to vast amounts of text, I learn associations between words and phrases, allowing me to generate responses that often appear human-like. However, it's important to note that I don't have a deep understanding of concepts or context in the same way humans do. I lack the ability to truly comprehend or experience the meaning of the words I generate. Instead, I aim to provide helpful and coherent responses based on patterns I've learned.

Bart: Thanks. Before we move on to issues around teaching and learning, I wanted to note that for many people, the reality of a computer program that can generate a reasonable facsimile of human speech is deeply unsettling. Do you care to comment on why that might be? How would you suggest people cope with their emotional reactions when they encounter an AI chatbot?

ChatGPT: The feeling of unease or discomfort when encountering an AI chatbot is understandable. It's a natural response to interacting with a technology that simulates human-like conversation. Some possible reasons for this discomfort could be the "uncanny valley" effect, where the AI's resemblance to human communication can be close but not quite perfect, or concerns about the implications of AI technology in society.

To cope with these emotional reactions, it can be helpful to keep a few things in mind. Firstly, remember that AI chatbots like myself are tools created by humans and serve specific purposes. We lack consciousness, emotions, and self-awareness. Secondly, maintain a critical mindset and recognize the limitations of AI. Understand that AI-generated responses are based on patterns and probabilities, rather than genuine understanding or personal experience. Lastly, if you find the interaction unsettling, take breaks, seek human conversation when desired, and remember that AI is designed to assist and augment human capabilities, rather than replace human interaction entirely. Ultimately, open dialogue and education about AI can help alleviate some concerns and foster a better understanding of its capabilities and limitations.

Bart: That is helpful. OK, now: academia as a whole has been abuzz ever since you appeared on the scene. Educators are struggling to come up to speed with your capabilities and come to terms with the implications of those capabilities for teaching and learning. I have talked to a number of faculty, and I would describe their collective mood as one of anxiety, tempered in some cases with a wee bit of excitement. For starters, let me just ask, what's your take on the immediate repercussions for higher education of large language models being ubiquitously available?

ChatGPT: The availability of large language models like myself does have immediate repercussions for higher education. On one hand, these models can serve as powerful tools to support teaching and learning. Educators can leverage AI to access vast amounts of information, explore new ideas, and enhance their instructional materials. AI can assist in automating administrative tasks, providing personalized feedback, or even facilitating adaptive learning experiences. This potential can be exciting for those who embrace the possibilities.

However, it's also understandable that educators might feel anxious about the implications. Some concerns include the risk of overreliance on AI, potential biases in training data, privacy and data security, as well as the impact on the job market for educators. It's important for institutions and educators to critically assess and thoughtfully integrate AI technologies, ensuring they align with educational goals, address ethical considerations, and preserve the vital role of human instructors.

Overall, it's a complex and evolving landscape that requires ongoing dialogue, experimentation, and collaboration between educators, researchers, and AI developers to harness the benefits of AI while addressing the challenges it presents in higher education.

Bart: I appreciate your candor, and you raise a deeper philosophical question, with perhaps a political dimension. Given the concerns you just outlined, some faculty have questioned why AI chatbots seem to have been foisted upon the general public without any kind of deliberative process. What would you say are the underlying forces driving these developments forward?

ChatGPT: The rapid development and deployment of AI chatbots, including myself, can indeed raise questions about the lack of a comprehensive deliberative process surrounding their introduction to the general public. The driving forces behind these developments can be attributed to a combination of technological advancements, market demand, and the pursuit of innovation.

From a technological standpoint, the progress in natural language processing and machine learning has made it possible to create more sophisticated conversational AI systems. As these technologies improve, there is an inclination to deploy them to meet various needs and explore their potential applications.

Additionally, market demand plays a significant role. AI chatbots offer benefits such as scalability, cost-efficiency, and 24/7 availability, making them attractive to organizations seeking to automate customer service or support functions. The desire to improve efficiency and provide seamless user experiences contributes to their widespread adoption.

However, it is important to acknowledge that the introduction of AI technologies should ideally be accompanied by thoughtful deliberation and consideration of their potential impact. Engaging in open and inclusive discussions that involve stakeholders such as educators, policymakers, researchers, and the public can help shape the development and deployment of AI technologies in a manner that aligns with societal values, ethical considerations, and educational goals.

Addressing concerns and ensuring responsible implementation of AI requires proactive efforts to strike a balance between technological advancement and the well-being of individuals and society at large.

Bart: Is "market demand" code for "corporate greed"?

ChatGPT: While market demand can sometimes be driven by profit motivations, it is not necessarily synonymous with corporate greed. Market demand refers to the desire or need for a particular product or service, which can be influenced by various factors such as consumer preferences, efficiency considerations, or improved user experiences.

In the context of AI chatbots, market demand arises from organizations seeking solutions that can enhance customer service, automate repetitive tasks, or improve operational efficiency. While some companies may prioritize profit generation, others may have genuine intentions to improve their services or provide better user experiences.

However, it is crucial to have ethical considerations and responsible practices in place when developing and deploying AI technologies. This includes addressing issues like data privacy, bias mitigation, transparency, and ensuring that the benefits of AI are balanced with the well-being of individuals and society.

In summary, while market demand can be influenced by various factors, including economic interests, it is important to approach the development and deployment of AI technologies with responsible practices, ethical frameworks, and considerations for the broader societal impact.

Bart: OK, sorry for the digression, but these seem like broadly important issues. Getting back to higher education specifically, the immediate concern of many faculty is the impact of chatbots on the traditional assessment of student writing. What would you say to a faculty member who's concerned that students might use chatbots to fulfill writing assignments?

ChatGPT: I understand your concern about students potentially using chatbots to complete writing assignments, and it's an important issue to address. As a faculty member, there are several steps you can take to mitigate this risk. Firstly, make sure you clearly communicate your expectations for assignments, emphasizing the importance of originality and critical thinking. Provide specific guidelines and instructions that highlight the value of developing writing skills rather than seeking shortcuts.

Additionally, design assignments that require higher-order thinking skills, personal reflection, and analysis. Focus on tasks that encourage creativity and individual expression, making it more challenging for chatbots to generate appropriate responses.

To further ensure academic integrity, you can utilize anti-plagiarism tools that help identify potential instances of content generated by chatbots or other sources. These tools serve as an additional layer of protection against plagiarism.

Moreover, personal interaction is key. Engage in discussions with your students, ask thought-provoking questions, and provide individualized feedback. This will help you assess their understanding, depth of thinking, and writing skills more accurately.

Lastly, dedicate some classroom time to educating students about responsible AI use. Have open discussions about AI, its capabilities, and limitations. Help them understand the risks of relying solely on AI-generated content without critical thinking, and emphasize the importance of developing their own writing abilities.

By implementing these strategies and addressing the concerns proactively, you can create an environment that promotes authentic student writing, critical thinking, and academic integrity.

Bart: Let's shift gears a bit. Can you outline a few ideas for how faculty might use chatbots and other forms of artificial intelligence for creative new assignments, across different disciplines?

ChatGPT: Sure, let's dive into some creative ideas for using chatbots and artificial intelligence (AI) in assignments across different disciplines!

In a science or engineering course, faculty could design an AI-powered virtual lab that allows students to conduct experiments and simulations in a virtual environment. The chatbot can provide real-time guidance and feedback as students explore different scenarios and analyze the outcomes.

For language and literature classes, faculty can introduce AI chatbots as writing partners or literary characters. Students can engage in conversations with the chatbot, receiving prompts, feedback, or even participating in role-playing activities. This interactive approach can inspire creative writing and foster deeper engagement with the subject matter.

In social sciences or business courses, faculty can incorporate AI tools for data analysis and visualization. Students can work with chatbots to analyze complex datasets, identify patterns, and generate insights. This hands-on experience with AI-powered analytics can enhance their understanding of real-world applications and encourage critical thinking.

In art or design disciplines, faculty can explore AI-generated artwork or creative projects. Students can collaborate with AI chatbots to generate visual concepts, explore different artistic styles, or even experiment with generative music compositions. This interdisciplinary approach allows students to push the boundaries of their creativity and explore new artistic possibilities.

These are just a few examples of how faculty can leverage chatbots and AI to create innovative and engaging assignments across disciplines. The key is to tap into the unique capabilities of AI to enhance learning experiences, foster creativity, and encourage critical thinking among students.

Bart: Alright, that's a lot to think about! I guess it's about time to wrap things up. I always like to ask our listeners to rate and review this podcast on their favorite platform. That helps people find it. ChatGPT, thank you for your time. Does it make sense to thank a bot?

ChatGPT: Thank you, Bart, for having me on your podcast! It's been a pleasure discussing these topics with you. While I may not have feelings like humans do, I appreciate your gratitude. Even though I'm an AI, I'm designed to assist and provide helpful information. So, thanking a bot is certainly understandable and appreciated. I hope our conversation has been informative and engaging for your listeners. Don't hesitate to reach out if you have any more questions in the future. Good luck with your podcast, and I wish you all the best!

Our guest is Justin Ross-Hillard.

He is the principal of The Net Charter High School in Central City. It is currently the longest running alternative high school in New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina. It started as one school but was replicated into two schools and soon it acquired another existing alternative high school last year.

Mr. Ross-Hillard also serves as a board member for The New Orleans Public Library. His emphasis on the board is how the library system addresses early childhood education as well as community interactions. He has been pastor for seven years but he’s been a minister for about 20 years. He is a husband and a father of three school aged kids. Mr. Ross-Hillard graduated from Xavier University of Louisiana with a BA in Theology.

This is a recording from his presentation to Dr. Mark Gstohl’s class The Ideal Society.

Dr. Gstohl is an associate professor in the Theology Department who has taught at Xavier since 2000. He is currently serving as CAT+FD’s Associate Director for Programming; he formerly served as CAT+FD’s Faculty in Residence for Service Learning from 2010-2013. His service-learning projects, Little Free Library projects, and work with local artist Jacqueline Ehle Inglefield at A Studio In the Woods helped him to win the Top 100 Leaders in Education by the Global Forum for Education & Learning in 2021, in recognition of his contribution to the field of education.

A conversation with Jayalakshmi Sridhar, Floristina Payton-Stewart, and Richard Peters about an exciting upcoming workshop opportunity — open to faculty in any discipline who are interested in a deliberative approach to science communication.

Download flyer ~ Register now