Top of Mind with Tambellini Group
Top of Mind with Tambellini Group
ChatGPT on Campus: How AI Tools are Changing Teaching and Learning
It’s no secret that the adoption of AI tools in higher education is growing by the day, and ChatGPT is leading the pack. Our Top of Mind guest this month, Dr. Lin Lin Lipsmeyer, Chair of the Department of Teaching and Learning at the Simmons School of Education and Human Development at Southern Methodist University, gives us a thorough overview of the broad spectrum of views and opinions about ChatGPT’s future impact and its potential uses as both a teaching and learning tool.
Welcome to the Tambellini Group's February Top of Mind Podcast. I'm your host, Liz Farrell. This month we're doing a deep dive into ChatGPT and its implications for teaching and learning in higher education. For those who aren't familiar with ChatGPT, and I doubt there are many, but it is a new cutting e dge AI chatbot created by the San Francisco b ased company, OpenAI, and it enables natural language conversations. It became publicly available at the end of November 22, and it's different from other AI applications, not only for its sophistication, but because it's both free and widely accessible. In early December, the New York Times heralded it as quite simply the best AI chatbot ever released to the general public. And across all social media channels, experts a re h eralding i t as the thing that's going to change how everything is going to be different going forward. So since it's launched about three months ago, ChatGPT has also garnered a lot of attention and dialogue about its power and perils in the higher education realm. In a recent Atlantic essay writer, Stephen March proclaimed ChatGPT to be the death of the college essay. And yet another Atlantic article the following day by technology critic Ian Bogost, ran with the headline that ChatGPT is dumber than you think. As its responses are shallow, they lacked up in insight and are prone to inaccuracies. So clearly there's a wide spectrum of views and opinions on ChatGPT and a lot to sort out, and that's why we're honored to be joined today by Dr. Lin Lin Lipsmeyer, chair of the Department of Teaching and Learning at the Simmons School of Education and Human Development at Southern Methodist University. Lin is also the editor-in-chief of the Educational Technology Research and Development Journal, and this is one of the top journals in education research. She's been a professor of learning sciences and learning technologies for over 15 years, and in addition to earning her doctorate of education and instructional media and technology from Columbia University, she also has a certificate from MIT in Artificial Intelligence and its Implications for Business Strategy. Like many of her fellow leaders in academ, she's been closely following ChatGPT and the applications of other AI and technology tools. Welcome, Lin.
Speaker 2:Thank you Liz, for inviting me. It's my great pleasure to be here today.
Speaker 1:Well, we're certainly excited to have you here today. You have so much experience in this area. Can you tell us a little bit about what sparked your interest in this area of research and some of the work that you've done?
Speaker 2:Thank you, Liz. Please allow me to start with a quote by Walter Ong from his 1982 book entitled"Orality and Literacy." Ong was a cultural historian and literary critique who wrote extensively about the impact of writing on human thoughts and culture. According to Ong, most people are surprised and many distressed to learn that essentially the same objections urged against computers were urged by Plato against writing. Plato has Socrates saying that writing is inhuman, pretending to establish outside the mind what in reality can only be in the mind. The same is said about computers. And Plato also says that writing destroys memory. Those who use writing will become forgetful, relying on external resource for what they lack in internal resources. Writing weakens the mind. I thought Ong's comments were relevant because during our evolution from oral culture to literacy as opposed to now, few people are now against reading, writing, or literacy.
Speaker 1:And you hear that, I mean, just the fact that anyone would urge against writing. I love that quote and that you opened with that because it really shows how much we've evolved over time.
Speaker 2:Right, right. And it definitely frames the, you know, evolution of language and communications. And, we can talk more about that. So, to answer your question, I've been interested in ChatGPT because I've always been interested in written communications. My dissertation—I taught college at Columbia University 15 years ago—focused on asynchronous written dialogue in online learning environments. During my research on online learning, I became fascinated with hyperlinks. That is when we read and communicate online, we go from one link to the other. Instead of reading linearly, we create our own reading path and math maps. When we read online, then I started doing research on distractions, distributed cognition, medium multitasking, and human beings ability or inability to do several things at the same time, especially with the help of machines and technologies. So one of my first publications was a commentary piece at the National Academy of Sciences. When I wondered about the differences between focused cognition and non-focused or breadth biased cognition, cognitive control in media, multitasking behaviors. So all this naturally led my interest in human computer interactions and in how humans may be able to use technologies and artificial intelligence to enhance our abilities, to learn more, to do more, and to do a better job. So in 2018, my colleagues and I organized a 3D conference Bridging Human Intelligence and Artificial Intelligence, and we recently published a book with the same title as a follow-up of that conference. And, in teaching, I've taught courses, such as emerging technologies, technology-based learning environments. My students, most of them are teachers, IT personnel, and corporate trainers, always bringing their new ideas, technologies, challenges, and opportunities of technologies to the class discussions. So I always learn a lot from my students.
Speaker 1:I can imagine I'd love to be a fly on the wall in those rooms as all these ideas are so rapidly evolving. Speaking of the past few years, excuse me. Can you set the scene for us? There's been so much that's happened so quickly. We've had tthis period of rapid acceleration of remote learning and technology and hyper-focus on these things during COVID. What have you seen in terms of the general adoption of AI tools in higher ed for both the instructional and teaching side, helping as a tool for you and your peers, and also by students in both the sanctioned and discouraged ways?
Speaker 2:Yeah, Liz, your integration is absolutely on the mark. So the adoption of AI tools in higher education has been growing in recent years. Some examples include adaptive learning systems, personalized curator systems, language learning, plagiarism detection programs. So research-wise, umany funding agencies such as National Science Foundation have invested in the research and development of AI in education. My students and colleagues and I have also conducted research examining AI tools for attention and learning. So, you know, you mentioned about the rapid changes in the past years in terms of COVID. We know COVID has been a catalyst for the increased use of technologies such as ChatGPT and other AI-based tools in remote learning. So the sudden shift to remote learning has really highlighted the needs for innovative ways for teaching and learning. And, you know, technologies have been used to create content, facilitate communication and collaboration such as Zoom, using the Zoom, and support tutoring and assessment.
Speaker 1:So what do you think? I mean, there's been so much debate. The one thing we all seem to know for sure is that COVID has been a catalyst for these discussions about a lot of the common applications that you've just mentioned in terms of the plagiarism detection, other AI tools. So can you talk about what you see as some of the negative or positive impacts of that hyper-focus? We might even be able to say over the past couple of years on these things.
Speaker 2:So yeah, like you mentioned, tthe proctoring, plagiarism detection software have been used quite a lot in the past year or so in the remote-learning environment. So there are, you know, a lot of adaptive personalized learning systems. And of course, in the process, there have been concerns about privacy, security, accessibility issues, especially for people who have disabilities, and also the, effectiveness of such technologies like plagiarism detection technologies in preventing cheating. So there's definitely have been new uses as well as concerns of the technology uses.
Speaker 1:Yeah. And there was, I know you had mentioned as a negative impact, there's been some thought that there's been learning loss, this questioning of our students really learning or are they cheating. But I'm wondering in terms of the positive that you'd mentioned that there's more creative and integrated work than memory-based work. Can you explain what you mean by that?
Speaker 2:Right. You know, because of the concerns fof students cheating and the concerns of really assessing students authentic learning. So on the positive side, teachers have been more creative in giving assignments for the students. And these are the things that, you know, as educators, we want. Right? We want to facilitate more creative earning processes. So, to a degree, the remote learning has forced a lot of teachers, educators to think about other ways of assessing students. And, the assignments, a lot of their more other creative assignments such as asking students to create things and then talk about their products. A lot of hands-on, more creative assignments than just asking students to remember something and, you know, recite back to the teachers.
Speaker 1:Less of that didactic approach and more of that engagement.
Speaker 2:Right.
Speaker 1:Which maybe on the surface people would think, oh, well, that's just gonna make it easier for them to not do the work. And it's been fascinating as you point out to see that there actually have been ways to use these tools that are more engaging. And what that brings us to is, you know, against that backdrop, we see ChatGPT comes up, the internet explodes over it. Can you describe your initial response? I know this wasn't something that just came out of nowhere for you. You, knew it was out there and had used it before then, but I'd like to hear from you as someone who is so engaged in this field and a leader in it. Like, what did you see as those, that cross-section of responses? Can you summarize for our listeners the range of reactions and themes and topics they fell under?
Speaker 2:Right. I would say my initial response was that I was impressed.
Speaker 1:Okay.
Speaker 2:And I would say that there have been mixed responses and emotions about ChatGPT. People have been, you know, excited or indifferent, hesitant, concerned. Personally, I put ChatGPT in a group of disruptive technologies, such as things like the typewriter, calculator, computer, internet, Google, iPhone, and YouTube. So there are, as we know, looking back a t all t hese technologies, we love them, right? They, have been really helping us, d o things that we would not otherwise, b e able to do. But when they came about, if we remember, they al l h a d t h is k ind of reactions, right? Yo u k now, th ey were always fears when new technologies came about. Now of course, ri ghtfully, th ere are a lot of concerns. For example, wi th ChatGPT, the cheating b e cause it writes so well. In accurate i nformation. And to respond to that, teachers need to think about their teaching methods and ethics bias and so forth. We can talk more about that. So, it's interesting, during November and December last year, when ChatGPT came about during that time, my colleagues and I organized a series of speaker events focusing on artificial intelligence for teaching and learning. It was supported by SMU's Simmons School of Education and Human Development. We invited Dr. George Siemens of University of South Australia and University of Texas in Arlington, Dr. Sydney D'Mello of University of Colorado- Boulder, Dr. Nia Dowell, University of California- Irvine, Dr. Christina Gardner-McCune of University of Florida, and Dr. Suku Nair, Vice Provost for Research and Chief Innovative Officer at SMU, to be speakers and panelists. The speakers discussed the literacy and ethical implications of AI for teaching and learning. We talked about, global AI initiatives, K-12 AI initiatives. So when chatGPT ccame out at the time in late November, a colleague asked ChadGPT who is George Siemens, our lead speaker, and panelist. We received a very well-written bio of Dr. Siemens. Better than the one I wrote, honestly, to introduce him to our audience. I felt a bit humiliated but we were all quite impressed by the chatGPT's bio for George Siemens.
Speaker 1:Yeah, it's, it's funny when you say that because you started by saying, I was very impressed. That was your initial reaction with ChatGPT and then you said, well, I felt foolish. And you've talked a bit about, can you talk about some of those mixed emotions that people have. I know you had mentioned like, students are going to be released in a world that has this tool, and we need to teach them how to use it, and we're not prepared to do that. Can you explain some of those other sort of paradoxes that people are, are feeling about this in this early times of adoption?
Speaker 2:Right. So again, it goes back to what you just said the mixed emotions. One of the scholars that influenced my own thinking quite a lot is Marshall McLuhan. And, you know, his work talks about media and technologies being extensions and amputations of human bodies. With artificial intelligence, especially here ChatGPT, we may be, you know, we are enabled to produce better essaywritings with less effort orno effort. While at the same time, we will need to think about our traditional literacy skills, the ability to read and write, has been taught. So we need to constantly examine the tools and sources behind the writings. At least for the moment, ChatGPT does not give us citations or references. It is based on big dataset still. We don't know where, you know, how, where, where they're from. So there's definitely, you know, the concern for bias, misinformation, and disinformation.
Speaker 1:Yes. And there's that parallel that you had mentioned when you were talking about disruptive, disruptive tools of the calculator.
Speaker 2:Mm-hmm.
Speaker 1:And I was thinking about that in terms of, you know, another thing you had said, we have to teach people how to use these tools. Like, I remember, I think when I was in high school and in AP calculus, that was the first time that they had these like graphing calculators. And there was a lot of the teachers are, yes, you're able to use them in the exams, but it was a different way of learning about, you know, arcs and signs and cosigns and all of that. And as someone in being one of the first users, I thought, yes, this is gonna make this so much easier for me. And then you realize it really doesn't, because you have to understand the concepts, the theories, and how to apply them. It is, at the end of the day, just a tool. So there is, you know, some talk of, or we know some places have maybe initially banned, and we know this is a moving target every day, but do you think that a ban is a probable or likely, or even well-advised approach to this? I've seen some debates about that. I'd be curious to hear if you think writ large that that's something that can or will happen.
Speaker 2:Right. Well, personally, II don't think it is feasible or a good idea to ban ChatGPT or, you know, other AI technologies, along the way. I mentioned Walter Ong's work arguments at the beginning of our conversation. So history, you know, shows that banning something tech, especially, technologies, it doesn't really work in the long run. And it may not be fair actually for everyone, because some people will always have access while other people are, being banned or being deprived of using the technologies. And so instead of banning it, it may be a good idea to incorporate, you know, in this case cChatGPT, may be flipped learning, having students explore and provide their critical thinking about the writings that are, produced by ChatGPT and teachers can use the ChatGPT also to, to really help students learn about reading and writing, examining the writing, helping students develop critical thinking skills or creativity. And another part is like what you just said earlier, it's not just using the tool is itself actually is a skill, right? It's not like just, you know, even calculator,.You think, oh, I gave you a calculator, you just know how to use it. That's not necessarily true. Right? All the technologies, sometimes, you know, we say technology is good or bad, especially for an educational setting. A nd a lot of times it i s not about a technology being bad or good. A lot of times it is how we use it, how we best use it, how we use the technology critically t o really m aximize the benefits and minimize the risks or drawbacks.
Speaker 1:And especially with something that's evolving right now, you know, there seems to be at least some consensus that as you're saying, like, we've gotta figure out how to use it. We're not just going to judge it outright. But I imagine that's where a lot of the, the apprehension comes from with that excitement, because we're so early in understanding the potentials and the drawbacks of this, it's really hard to do anything but continue experimenting with it, continue talking about it, and continuing to evaluate how it's working in various applications.
Speaker 2:Yes, I absolutely agree. Yeah.
Speaker 1:So why do you think that ChatGPT is so different and has garnered so much attention? I mean, we've talked about how great it is, but can we, can we break that down a bit? Like, what are some of the most significant differences you see between ChatGPT and some of its predecessors?
Speaker 2:Yes, yes, Liz, this is, important question. There are a few significant differences. For example, ChatGPT has the ability to generate human-like responses to a wide range of prompts that respond in a natural way.
Speaker 1:Okay, so natural. But what I see of that phrase, a lot like human-like responses, natural language. Can you break that down for us in layman's terms?
Speaker 2:Right. In a way, you do a Google search, you get hundreds of all these links, right? You go click on those links, but ChatGPT when you type a keyword or a question, it gives you a paragraph, right? It's almost like when, just like now, when you ask me a question, I don't just give you a list of links, I answer you, I try to answer you in a paragraph, right? Tell a story. So that's what ChatGPT does. It gives you a paragraph and the paragraph is generated based on a large set of conversational text, and then you can ask further, and then it'll fine-tune itself. That's another thing that's really done very well by ChatGPT, better than other chats out there. It fine tunes itself. You can continue to ask the question and then it will refine itself and give you a different answer. And hopefully that answer is better closer to what you are asking. So it has the ability, 1) is sort of really have a conversation; 2) the conversation is based on, you know, large dataset, and it fine tunes itself sort of trying to be real,; and 3) it's free. It's open-source. It's availability of, you know, print and train models. So the significance, the implications, I think, is what you're trying to get, for higher education. For example, it can help summarize scientific papers. And we know how hard that takes a lot of time to do.
Speaker 1:Abstract upfront is the hardest thing to write, right?
Speaker 2:Right. Right. The meta-analysis synthesis of scientific papers. And, that's amazing. It can, you know, it helps as essay writing, which is the biggest concern. Now, it writes better, writes better than me. I even have a doctoral degree. It does language translation. I use Google Translate all the time. When I go between the languages and, I have more confidence in ChatGPT in its ability to translate. And that means, you know, it just opens a whole new world of people being able to communicate with each other without the language barriers. And then the question/answer in the automatic question answer, so you could provide virtual tutors. And actually this morning I was just thinking, you know, nowadays we talk about counseling, therapy all the time. Psychological impacts of COVID. This if done well, it's more advanced. It's it can almost be a therapist for someone. Right? So, I can see a lot of potentials, I think. I think that's why it's sort of getting a lot of attention. It just better version of a lot of things that are already here.
Speaker 1:You've mentioned too, you said, unlike some other recent high-profile advances in aAI, as of this was December, 2022, there's no sign of an official peer review, peer review technical paper about ChatGPT yet. So can you tell us why? Is it just because it's so early on, or do you know of any that are in the works, and what do you think they may focus on?
Speaker 2:Yeah, I mean, ChatGPT just came out really publicly last November. And as you know, peer reviewed journal articles take almost a year to come out.
Speaker 1:Yes.
Speaker 2:So, from that sense, of course, it's, nothing. I won't be surprised things will come out about ChatGPT soon. Now, the journals are also vtrying to catch up quickly. There have been a lot of publications on technologies related technologies like chats. Even myself, my students and I, we did, a study for a different purpose. We had, AI chats trying to survey, as like bodies, to try to distract students when the students are in the lectures. And we want to see to extent the distraction by the AI chat affects the students learning of the lectures. To extent the students are able to pay attention to the lectures. To extent they're able to remember what they watched in the lectures. And we looked at the, the students ability to be able to multitask. So we did that study in 2013. So there have been a lot of studies related, but ChatGPT specifically, I'm sure there are going to be peer review journal articles coming out the next few months.
Speaker 1:Yeah, it will be interesting to see because of the unique differentiators that you've described how much of that research into the implications, the impacts, the other things that you mentioned looking at, at that, in that 2013 paper will have similar findings. Like, you know, are we going to follow this similar trajectory where there's this, oh, we don't know what this is going to do at first, but we think these things might be good and be bad, and then we have this refined use for it. Especially, you know, this is a moving target. We know things like ChatGPT 4 is coming out later on and everything. So it's gonna be fascinating to see. And again, with the recognition that we're very early in this whole journey, very exciting journey nonetheless. And we don't have any of that peer reviewed research. I'm curious if you can break down for us some of those differences and how they are specifically different for higher ed. I know we've talked a little bit about plagiarism. I mean, can you speak to how this might be different here and, and some of these other things that you've mentioned?
Speaker 2:Right. I think it's just going to continue to evolve actually. I was thinking, you know, several colleagues and I, we just had another paper just out a few weeks ago— program called Pack Back. It's AI enabled program that would help students ask better questions in discussion forums. Also would allow the instructors to grade students more easily based on the AI prompts. You know, whether the students, only said, I agree or disagree, to the entent of how the depths of the students questions responses, as well as the citations and references the students used to generate their, discussion postings. So I think, you know, with the excitement of ChatGPT, other programs out there are going to also see how they can improve, you know, their products. On the other side. Also, of course, the risks and the drawbacks of ChatGPT are plagiarism. Plagiarism is one aspect hopefully that will get us or think more about other ways of teaching, more creative ways. Or teaching students new skills that will really be important tto be able to work along ChatGPT and other AI technologies. And another, you know, big, big concern, of course, is the bias because ChatGPT, the content is generated based on whatever is all there. And as we all know, there's a lot of, bias, misinformation, disinformation that are there on the internet and ChatGPT will just, you know, put them all together. So there are efforts that are put into trying to counter, you know, the biases, misinformation. Still, it's evolving. People are continuously putting in data. So, I don't think we can completely get rid of them. It takes us all the people, all the users to be vigilant, to examine, constantly examining the content. Constantly, really look at how this echnology is evolving.
Speaker 1:Yes, yes, for sure. I mean, one of the things that you had mentioned as well was this need for digital literacy. Right? We've been hearing about that for years, but this is, in my estimation, it seems to make the need for that to teach that in an even more sophisticated manner.
Speaker 2:I agree. I completely agree.
Speaker 1:On that note, I read a recent article in Times Higher Education, and I quoted this associate professor at Wharton who studies innovation. His name's Ethan Molik, and he said, we have to both panic about how ChatGPT is changing everything, but also think about how we can use it. And I think that that echoes with a lot of what you've said here. Can you talk about some of those ethical considerations for tthe dilemmas in the decision-making process?
Speaker 2:Right. So the dilemma,. I guess I would agree to this with this statement, except that I don't think we need to panic yet. Okay, sure. I think it's important to get ahead of the ethical design requirements, and it's important to pay attention to both tthe benefits and risks and use them responsibly. I think it's important tto really consider the negative implications of the models. For example, the ability to generate human-like text can lead to the spread of misinformation or the manipulation of the public opinion. And, we all as humans, you know, we like stories, right? We need the context. So I think those are all very important, like you mentioned previously.
Speaker 1:Yeah. And with the tool evolving so much, you know, it seems like banning it, as you've said, it's not really an option. It's going to be very hard to monitor that, because you can produce so many permutations of different prompts when you ask a question and get different responses,
Speaker 2:Right, right. Yeah. So there are all these different things. I think as educators, as policy makers, parents, teachers, students, IT folks, I think all the stakeholders should be involved in this process, really to, you know, constantly look at the potential biases. Look into the training and resources as you mentioned earlier. And you know, the guidelines, we need to update the guidelines, ubest, best practices. And that's going to be continuous because it just changes so fast. And, really, I think collaboration is important. Collaboration between different stakeholders, because we all know what we, our little thing, without collaboration, we really don't know the big picture. So collaborating between the stakeholders is very important.
Speaker 1:And you mentioned this need for collaboration. Everyone has a responsibility in this. But what do you see specifically for those in the teaching and, and learning realm for being their responsibility? Is it to be the convener? Do you find that, you know, not only within your own institution, but beyond that are others faculty who aren't as well versed in teaching and learning pedagogy and everything else? Like, are they turning to you all for guidance on these things? And do you feel that that's a specific role that you all should serve? Like, how do you go about being responsible, if at all, for shaping policies as part of a larger institution or ecosystem of educators and administrators at universities? Not even in the US but across the world,
Speaker 2:Right? Yeah. In fact, as new, just in the last few weeks, facilitated by the SMU's Provost Office, a group of faculty and staff members across the campus have come together to discuss ways to open a campus-wide discussion about ChatGPT and generative AI. So, the folks include course instructors, the Center of Teaching Excellence, libraries, d ifferent institutes, h e Office of Information T echnology, and of course, the Simmons School of Education and Human Development. So, the faculty a nd staff have been invited to join conversations in c lassroom instructions, pedagogies, research innovations, e thical legal policy implications. So, this is sort of, you know, on the campus w here I am now. I assume many other h igher education i nstitutions are doing something similar. But that's only, you know, that's just a small p art of what's going on at a global level. Like what you said, I think the parents, the students, t eachers, all the people, companies, t he designers, really a ll need to be thinking a bout the implications of artificial intelligence. I think a lot of people are, fortunately, I think, compared to other technologies before AI actually is one of the, I guess, areas that from the very start, people were looking at the ethical implications of the technologies, which is, you know, which is really amazing.
Speaker 1:Yes. That's a good part of it too because even though this is such a new and different tool, there is a bit of a blueprint there for things we have to consider and who can and should be involved in those conversations. So I hadn't thought about it that way, but you're right, there is, this is not totally new in that sense, and that these are conversations that have been happening around similar issues related to other tools and applications for a long time. So how do you see, we've talked about, again, moving target, rapidly evolving. How do you see ChatGPT and other tools changing in the coming year and going forward? And I know that you had a response from ChatGPT according to ChatGPT on the future of that. So I thought we could start with that, and then you can expound on that to show our listeners the difference between the two.
Speaker 2:Right? Yeah, it is interesting. So of course, every time when you ask the question to ChatGPT— What's the future of ChatGPT?—It gives you a little bit of different answer. So I will read the two responses. One response was one that I put in few days ago. Another response is one of the responses t hat I got from today, just a few minutes ago. So the one from, from a few days ago, a ccording to ChatGPT, the future of ChatGPT and other large language models like it will likely involve continued advancements in natural language processing and machine learning. This could lead to improvements in t he m odel's ability to understand and respond to a wide range of inputs, as well as increased flexibility and customization of specific use cases. Additionally, there may be increased use of these models in various industries and applications such as customer service, language translation, and content generation. However, it is also important to consider ethical and societal implications of such technology. So that was a few days ago, and before, you know, we started our conversation, I thought that I would be typing again just to see what ChatGPT says now. So this is one of the responses, the future of ChatGPT is uncertain as it depends on the advancements in artificial intelligence, the development of similar AI models and the demand for such technology. However, open AI plans to continue improving and updating the model to provide better and more efficient AI powered conversation. Interesting. So as you can see, there are similarities, but there are differences in the two responses.
Speaker 1:And do you think that both of those are correct?
Speaker 2:They both have a little bit of different emphasis, right? The second one mentioned OpenAI, the company. The first one didn't. So the second one also I guess mentioned about a bit more uncertainty and a focus on AI powered conversation. While the first one, I think was broader, had almost like a bigger vision to a degree. So, it's interesting. It's interesting. I don't know what extent it gave me the second answer based on what I asked previously, right? So, it'll be interesting to continue to check. Yeah. So I think it's interesting to note that this technology is continuously evolving. A nd, a s ChatGPT mentioned, t here are changes like o n the training on larger, more diverse data s ets. I think o ther things like improved multi mo del o r multimedia capabilities. Th ere are a lot of things that I think, Ch atGPT can do to improve or, pe ople, the designers can help together can help improve.
Speaker 1:You mentioned too, I think that images, texts and sounds
Speaker 2:Yeah. So we are so used to, Alexa, Echo, Siri, right? And they're not that different from ChatGPT, right? Because when you ask question, they give you some answers. They're not to extend as ChatGPT. So I won't be surprised a lot of these different, technologies are going to converge and they are going to, you know, learn from each other or borrow from each other. And, you know, recently we've been all talking about virtual reality, augmented reality, metaverse, so things are going to converge and also sort of, you know, I guess diverge and evolve. So, it'll be exciting to see what's going to happen next.
Speaker 1:It certainly will be. I guess in closing, I'm wondering, do you have any esources or people that you would recommend that our listeners check out to learn more about this, that you find credible and helpful?
Speaker 2:Yeah. In the National Science Foundation, for example, because that's what I pay attention to, has invested a lot in, AI technologies. For example, there are several, big AI institutes. Digital Promise, which is one of the nonprofit organizations out there that f ocus on t echnologies i n K-12 i n educational a reas. O n the global level, George Siemens started this grill association. So, there are a lot of good efforts that are out there. So, personally, I'm very excited again about the ChatGPT and I think we need to engage all the stakeholders, including students, teachers, and a lot of times actually, we can learn a lot from our children. Often our children approach t his destructive technologies with a very healthy sense of awe a nd curious sense of play. And in that process, they find limitations and frustrations. So I think as adults, a lot of times, rather than try and just say no to our children, maybe we can partner with our children and of course, partner with the new technologies. You know, AI teaming is something that I think in a lot of people's mind. And I think finally, I think we need to be developing, encouraging, critical thinking. I think critical thinking is more important than ever. So with critical thinking, we can hopefully continuously distinguish the authentic information from misinformation, disinformation, improve the technologies around us, so that we can do better with the help of technologies.
Speaker 1:Well, that's a very optimistic note to end on. And we're gonna be very excited looking in this space going forward. Lin, thank you so much for taking the time today to talk with us. I've learned so much from our conversation, and I'm sure our listeners will as well.
Speaker 2:Thank you very much for having me.
Speaker 1:That concludes this month's podcast of Tambellini's Top of Mind. You can check out the rest of our resources on our blog at thetambellinigroup.com.