I’ve mentioned this previously, I didn’t know ChatGPT was a thing till I started this course. I thought everyone was still on their grammarly wave. I was wrong. The readings that were selected by Javon for this week were insightful, at least for me considering I knew nothing about ChatGPT. The future of this AI is scary, at least for me. I definitely feel like we are headed towards a new reality, except this time it’s a reality of the films we use to make. Alone we are having an issue of not enough jobs. The argument (which I disagree) is that immigrants are taking “our jobs.” I just feel that they are doing the jobs we don’t want, but that’s another post for another time. But now the question of whether ChatGPT can take over human jobs is drawing to attention. Now make that make sense. People in America are having this issue and argument that there are not enough jobs because of immigrants but we are creating a system that can take over and replace humans? Yes while it is unlikely as stated in the article that they can completely replace human workers, there is still some lead way for the system to take many jobs, it’s just not all of them. Yes AI systems are designed to assist with certain tasks, but they are not capable of replicating the full range of abilities and skills that humans possess. But that doesn’t mean they won’t ever be able to. If a system as such was already able to be created who knows what else can be done in order for an AI system like ChatGPT is able to do it all.

The article is counteractive in demonstrating that ChatGPT can and can not do in regards to what they can replace. But I don’t find that convincing. If we are already creating a space for AI systems to co-exist, it makes me wonder if we would continue to create a space where an AI system just completely replaces everything. ChatGPT is being utilized by many, its writing kids papers for school; it’s already holing a powerful stance when it comes to academics. It’s leading the way of what papers should look like and how they should be written. That already takes away some creativity. Even if it’s not creative writing, I feel that any paper you write does hold some creativity. Because you wrote it, you created it, you put your own voice in that writing. Everything we do produce and create does have a bit of that creative element to it, because it’s ours. CHATGPT could neva! But jokes aside, I do find it alarming for a system as such to exist and I think a system like this should be used with a grain of salt in order to give work by humans a purpose. Because the human touch is needed. If it’s not clear, I do have some strong views of ChatGPT; I am completely against it.

The two readings that I picked that were provided, went hand in hand. I feel like one gave the background clarity while the other was educating you on what to do with that background. The body that keeps the score reading went into detail how to get through the difficulties that arise from your traumatic past by revealing the psychology behind them. However that is not always easy, getting through your traumatic past if you are unaware that you are reacting in the first place. That’s where How to Help a Traumatized Child in the Classroom comes into play. It mentions how a child’s behavior is a result of chronic exposure to traumatic events beyond his or her control. With a minor degree in psychology, I have studied that many of our traumatic events that happen in our lives stay in our subconscious, and when things are kept there we are unaware we act and do things a certain way, because we don’t even know that we are doing them.

As an educator myself, I found how to help children in a the classroom reading to be very insightful, in other words in resonated with me more than the other. I liked how it brought points to discussion but also awareness. I am guilty of occasionally having to raise my voice every now and then. Because sometimes I am not going to lie, it seems to be the only way high school kids will listen. While I try to stir away from yelling and really getting to that point with my kids, I never thought how that could provoke any trauma they keep in. Classrooms should be a safe space for children of all ages, and I as an educator, it is my responsibility to do so. I definitely kept not of creating a calm environment and adapting classroom’s mindfulness. I am a big believer in energy transfer which is why I always try to remain calm and together when I am around anyone else. I know that energy is a big mood shifter, and when I keep my own self happy and calm, it transfers and is picked up by others. Because I also know when I am having a bad day, I can make someone else almost have a bad day too.

Being an educator is a hard job, and it often comes with many challenges. Especially when you have kids who don’t want to listen. But these readings were a reminder to keep my peace, protect my own energy, so I can also be everyone else’s peace as well. Trauma is an interesting thing, and the way it stays with us forever is an ongoing issue we will always have to work on. But as an educator, I can help be a positive light for my students.

Our previous Thursday class was very interesting as we dived into each others voice in writing in comparison to a computer system, Chat GPT. I find it to be very clear that while a computer system as such may be a cool demonstration of what a writing prompt can or should look like, (kind of one of those things where you see this is what you should or should not do) but at the end of the day, it is not authentic, not original, and not creative. It’s missing the most important part, the human, Without that human touch I feel as if though Chat GPT produced generic writing that maybe a more boring and traditional teacher would approve of. But with no personal touch or voice, if you use Chat GPT for one assignment or paper, you would have to keep using it because that would potentially be your “voice,” a computer.

Now diving into James McBride in preparation for his event on Thursday, I had a lot of interest when it came to reading and listening to the quarantine tapes. One thing that resonated most with me was when he said, “…I believe we have more in common than we are different.” In his book, Deacon King Kong McBride makes the cop in his story, the good man. As a Black author, I am sure he must have received some backlash from choosing to do so. I do agree with his statement, on why he chose to make the white cop a good man but it still does raise a question as to why the cop couldn’t be a bad guy to further tell the story that many Blacks do have to struggle and face. Because as we know, with a whole movement be centered towards the subject, seems like there is and never will be enough awareness for it. Because until the problem officially stops, we can’t stop making the conversation.

Questions for James McBride

1. Considering that you are a big advocate for for arts in school and without it robs children of their creativity, how do you feel about computer systems such as Chat GPT that write papers for students?
2. Why did you chose to make the white officer a good man instead of a bad man and create a positive outcome for the characters in the book?

Both the documentary and reading were both helpful and insightful to further dive into the subject of AI. Not sure if I have been living under a rock or something but being back in school for my second semester of graduate school, this is my first introduction of AI. I did have one student tell me one day that a system did write his paper, I was confused. With the lack of knowledge of these online tools, I had just assumed that the software had edited his paper for him to make it better. Little did I know.

I am not fully against computer systems. While there are more cons’ than pros’ of course, I do feel like in a way AI can benefit writers, if used correctly. But with everything in life, everything needs to be used with moderation. I like that in the reading there was a distinct message that compares what a creator and an artist is. This is important. While AI systems can be compared to ghost writers, AI still generates writing at a low bar. The artist/writer still needs to build and work on what was created. AI systems really can mostly push and help with any writers block one may have, and I feel like that’s what it mainly should be used for. Computer systems are trained to predict what comes next. And just like that YA author who was writing a fantasy novel and used AI, as we can predict, AI does not always have the best predictions itself of what should come next. The system should be used with a grain of salt, it may be helpful and it may inspire other ideas within yourself that was pushed.

I agree with HOLLYMAHOGANY, AI does loose that human touch. While it can be a great and helpful tool for writers and artists, it will still never be as creative as a human can be. In my opinion at least. While the tool can be there and used when needed, I don’t think it’s a system creators should primarily be fixated on using. It should be there as tool of recourse, not a tool for creativity.

Hi,

My name is Julie (although I usually prefer Jules, it’s what everyone pretty much calls me). This is my second semester of my graduate program here at Kean. And so far, not too shabby. I feel like I am right where I am suppose to be alongside with work and just life in general. Feeling pretty positive which is good because at least one thing is going right, right? Anyways, I’m 26 years old, I work at Passaic High School, I’m the youngest sibling of two, I have four pets, and I like to read and write. Which would make sense of my placement here I suppose. I’m also really big on film photography.

But yeah, I’m excited for this course and the things I will learn as I go.