Please read the article “ChatGPT is Making Universities Rethink Plagiarism” by Sofia Barnett. What do you think about issues of authorship, intellectual property, plagiarism, etc., as they relate to machine-generated text/Artificial Intelligence? Do you think the definition of plagiarism should be updated in the age of AI? If so, how? In other words, where should the line be drawn, between on the one hand using AI as a tool to support and assist in your writing, and on the other, over-relying on AI or outsourcing all writing work to it?
How, if at all, does Barnett’s article relate to the other article we read in class, “Loneliness is a Problem That AI Won’t Solve?” by Jessica Grose? Is there a social function to writing/reading/learning that connects these texts?
Before class if possible, post the answers to these questions below in the comment section. Let me know if you have any questions.
–What do you think about issues of authorship, intellectual property, plagiarism, etc., as they relate to machine-generated text/Artificial Intelligence?
Authorship and plagiarism are complex in relation to AI, as the work is not actually produced by a human. For example, if a student has an AI write something and does not acknowledge it, unless they are just using it as a source, that could be considered plagiarism. Additionally, it is still yet to be determined who owns the writing, given that the AI pulls from so many sources on the internet. Some people simply view AI as a tool and it is up to the user how they use it, but completing entire assignments with AI could be considered unethical. For some people AI can be a beneficial way of organizing thinking or creating something when they possess little time to do in their past or future. Schools must consider providing guidelines for the students as to where and how AI could be used.
–Do you think the definition of plagiarism should be updated in the age of AI? If so, how? In other words, where should the line be drawn, between on the one hand using AI as a tool to support and assist in your writing, and on the other, over-relying on AI or outsourcing all writing work to it?
No, I donât think the definition of plagiarism needs to change. If someone copies what AI writes without putting it into their own words, itâs still cheating. To me, itâs only different if the person gives clear instructions and ideas, and the AI just helps organize them. In that case, the person is still doing the thinking. But if they let AI do all the work and claim it as their own, thatâs still plagiarism.
–How, if at all, does Barnettâs article relate to the other article we read in class, âLoneliness is a Problem That AI Wonât Solve?â by Jessica Grose? Is there a social function to writing/reading/learning that connects these texts?
Both Barnett and Grose’s articles point out that AI can never take the place of actual thought or human connection. Barnett reported AI writing papers on behalf of students that could have negative implications for authentic learning. Grose points out that AI cannot cure loneliness, because we, as human beings, need social relationships with actual friends. Both articles emphasize that reading, writing and understanding provide us opportunity to understand each other and make connections. Both Barnett and Grose remind us that, as intelligent as our technology is, we need real people to learn and grow.
What do you think about issues of authorship, intellectual property, plagiarism, etc., as they relate to machine-generated text/Artificial Intelligence?
Do you think the definition of plagiarism should be updated in the age of AI? If so, how? In other words, where should the line be drawn, between on the one hand using AI as a tool to support and assist in your writing, and on the other, over-relying on AI or outsourcing all writing work to it?
How, if at all, does Barnettâs article relate to the other article we read in class, âLoneliness is a Problem That AI Wonât Solve?â by Jessica Grose? Is there a social function to writing/reading/learning that connects these texts?
There are many connections between the two articles, here is one example;
Barnette writes, “ChatGPT exists merely as a convenient research assistant”
Grose’ wrtites, “Companionship can be provided in the form of virtual assistants or chatbots, and these companions can engage in conversations, play games or provide information, helping to alleviate feelings of loneliness and boredom”