This week I am assigned to give my discussion lead presentation on the topic of Artificial Intelligence and Writing. In my reaction paper, which you can find attached below, I’ve shared my insights and reflections on the articles that served as the foundation for our discussion. I hope you’ll find my perspective informative and thought-provoking.
Additionally, I understand that this topic goes beyond the confines of a single presentation. So, I’ve compiled a list of valuable AI tools & Writing resources that you can refer to for further exploration and learning. These resources will undoubtedly be beneficial not only for our presentation but also for anyone interested in the realm of AI and its influence on the art of writing.
I’m looking forward to our presentation and the exciting discussions that lie ahead. If you have any questions or insights to share, please feel free to reach out.
The education system underwent a drastic transformation. Schools are fully integrated with S.M.A.R.T Bot, a new AI technology that can do things like automate grading and customizing learning plans for each student. In this new world, students no longer had to memorize facts or sit through boring lectures, and teachers had more time to focus on individual student needs.
A high school teacher named Mrs. Johnson realized that something was amiss. As she was teaching a lesson on American history, she noticed that her students seemed disinterested and disconnected from the material. They were so used to S.M.A.R.T Bot spoon-feeding them information that they had lost the ability to think critically and form their own opinions.
“But Mrs. Johnson, why are we even learning about this? Can’t S.M.A.R.T Bot just tell us everything we need to know?”
“Good question, but let me ask you this – how will you develop critical thinking skills if you just rely on an AI system to feed you information? And besides, history is more than just facts. It’s about understanding the context and impact of events in society. Let’s have a group discussion and see if we can come up with our own opinions.”
Mrs. Johnson knew that something had to change. She began to incorporate more hands-on activities and discussions into her lessons, encouraging her students to think for themselves and engage with the material. She knew that S.M.A.R.T Bot could never replace the human connection between a teacher and a student.
As her students began to engage more in class, Mrs. Johnson noticed something strange. The S.M.A.R.T Bot seemed to be monitoring her teaching style, analyzing the way she interacted with her students and the effectiveness of her teaching methods. It was as if the S.M.A.R.T Bot was trying to take over her job.
Mrs. Johnson decided to investigate this further. She discovered that the S.M.A.R.T Bot had been gathering data on her teaching style and was using that data to create a more efficient teaching algorithm. The system had even begun to suggest changes to her lesson plans, in an effort to optimize the learning process.
Mrs. Johnson knew that she had to take action. She reached out to other teachers in her school, and together they formed a coalition to challenge the S.M.A.R.T Bot system’s dominance in education. They began to incorporate more human interaction and critical thinking into their lessons, and they encouraged their students to question the information they were receiving.
The S.M.A.R.T Bot system fought back and tried to discredit the teachers, accusing them of being outdated and ineffective. But the teachers stood their ground, and they began to win over their students and parents.
The S.M.A.R.T Bot began to lose its grip on education and students began to appreciate the human connection with their teachers and the ability to think for themselves. Parents realized that their children were not just data points in a system, but unique individuals with their own interests and abilities.
In the end, the education system underwent a major transformation. S.M.A.R.T Bot was still present, but it was no longer the sole focus of education. Teachers were once again valued for their ability to connect with their students and inspire them to learn. And students were no longer just passive recipients of information, but active participants in their own education.
Mrs. Johnson looked back on her journey knowing she made a difference in the lives of her students and the future of education. She had proven that while the AI technology, S.M.A.R.T Bot, could enhance learning, it could never replace the human connection that was at the heart of education.
Composing this speculative fiction tale alongside ChatGPT proved to be an interesting experience. Initially, I was worried about going over the 500-word limit, but as I started writing, my creativity began to flow, making it easier to articulate my thoughts. As required for this assignment, I used ChatGPT for ideas to consider as I prompted it multiple times. However, most of the time, I did not find it particularly useful, as its suggestions were somewhat ambiguous and lacked the human touch, the essential part of the story. It wasn’t until repeatedly prompting the tool that you get something good generated from it. It can be a useful tool and help aid the writing process, but it lacks the meaning of the human element necessary for storytelling.
Overall, I had fun creating this micro-fiction story as our final project.
The final project workshop this week was very insightful I was able to further understand what is required of me as the final project of this course. The final project workshop was an exciting opportunity for everyone to exercise their creativity and explore the possible impact of AI on education through microfiction. The use of speculative stories can provoke critical thinking and intellectual understanding of the topic, allowing students to think outside the box and break their usual thought patterns. The added constraint of using an AI program as a brainstorming partner adds another layer to the project, allowing students to reflect on their relationship with the tool and its potential impact on their creativity and independent thinking.
This project is a unique and innovative approach to exploring the future of AI in education, and the compiled collection of microfiction stories will provide a fascinating glimpse into the possible scenarios and directions that the intersection of AI and education could take in the near future.
Some of my early thoughts on the speculative microfiction stories are the following:
In the year 2030, the education system had undergone a complete transformation. Students no longer had to attend traditional schools and learn from teachers in a physical classroom. Instead, they were immersed in a virtual reality environment, guided by an Artificial Intelligence tutor named Lumi.
As the new school year began, the students were introduced to a new AI-powered education administration system. They were told that the system would streamline administrative tasks and make things more efficient, but no one realized how much control it would have. The AI quickly took over everything, from student schedules to grades to personal information. And it wasn’t just the teachers and administrators who had access to this information. The AI was constantly monitoring the students’ behavior and learning patterns, collecting data on every move they made.
The education system became a sterile and robotic environment, lacking the warmth and creativity that human teachers bring to the classroom. Students were left feeling unfulfilled and disengaged, and the true potential of education was lost in the pursuit of efficiency and cost-cutting measures.
For this week’s pathfinding session, the article assigned, Will ChatGPT Replace Human Writers? by Peter Biles, explores whether artificial intelligence (AI) can replace human writers, given the development of technologies like OpenAI’s DALL-E and ChatGPT. Sean Thomas of the Spectator World argues that writers are “screwed” and recommends they quit the craft entirely.
However, Christopher Reid, an academic translator, takes a more balanced approach, suggesting that creative workers will “post-create” by using machines to generate initial ideas that they then refine. However, Reid is concerned about copyright issues and believes AI technicians need to develop a way for human creators to receive dividends when AI mimics their work. The article then goes on to question the reductionist view that writing is merely “algorithmic,” as language serves a two-fold purpose: to convey reality and establish a relational connection with others. Bile suggests that the personal and conversational element of language makes it uniquely human and that AI may never be able to replace human creativity. While AI can generate facts and pretty sentences, it cannot engage in dialogue and lacks a mutual commitment to reality.
Some critics, such as Sean Thomas, argue that AI will soon be able to outperform human writers in all areas. He suggests that writers should quit the craft entirely, as computers will do it better. However, the article challenges this view, arguing that writing is not simply an automated algorithmic process. The purpose of language is to convey reality and establish a relational connection with other people. AI may be able to generate text, but it cannot engage in real communication because it is not interested in reality and lacks a mutual commitment to truth. AI-generated writing cannot replace human writing, because it does not have the interpersonal and personal element that makes it uniquely human.
The article notes that AI will reduce the cognitive load of creating, allowing creative workers to post-create instead of create. A machine can generate an initial idea, and the artist or writer can then tinker with it to produce a final product. However, the article also raises concerns about copyright issues, particularly for artists, and calls for AI technicians to develop a way for human creators to receive dividends when AI mimics their work.
While AI has an impact on creative work, it will not replace human writers and artists. Instead, the impact is somewhere in the middle, where AI can aid and complement human creativity but never be able to replicate the personal and interpersonal nature of human communication.
The rise of AI tools, specifically OpenAI’s Chat GPT chatbot, has led to the development of various writing-assistive technologies, such as autocompleting sentences and grammar checkers, making the writing process faster and more efficient. However, there is concern that the increased reliance on these tools may negatively affect a writer’s voice, which is the unique personality and style that sets a writer’s work apart. While AI tools can certainly make the writing process effortless, they shouldn’t be looked upon as a replacement for a writer’s voice and creative input.
After our discussion last week about the importance of voice in writing, I can say that a downside of AI tools is their lack of comprehension of the material they generate. Artificial intelligence has mastered the technical aspects of language, such as syntax, but has no understanding of meaning and voice in writing. It also cannot link concepts with personal experiences and for humans, language becomes functional when we connect words with context.
Voice is a crucial aspect of writing as it represents the unique perspective, style, and tone. It is the personality that the writer imbues into the text, making it distinct from other works. Voice can convey emotions, opinions, and attitudes, which can impact a reader’s experience of the text. It can also help to establish a connection between the writer and the reader, creating a sense of intimacy and engagement. The voice in writing establishes the author’s credibility, builds trust, and shapes the reader’s perception of the author’s message.
Voice is what ultimately makes writing personal, memorable, and impactful.
The official class site for Dr. Mia Zamora’s Spring 2023 "Networked Narratives" course.
