Editor’s Note: In our winter issue, associate editor Margaret Fosmoe ’85 reported on issues involved in integrating artificial intelligence in the classroom at Notre Dame. She then fed her work of “real freaking human intelligence,” to borrow an honest-to-god person’s words from the story, into ChatGPT and gave it three prompts: Reproduce it in the style of a fifth-grade American boy, in a format appropriate for a university-level academic journal and in Elizabethan-era English. In less than five minutes, the program ingested Margaret’s article and spit out these versions.
In the style of a fifth-grade American boy:
Hey guys! Check out this super cool class at Notre Dame where they're using AI to do all sorts of stuff. So, there’s this professor, Mr. Behrens, and he’s teaching a class called Generative AI in the Wild. Sounds wild, right?
Okay, so here’s the deal. They’re using AI tools like ChatGPT and DALL-E to make things like pictures, essays, and even videos. And get this, they made a picture of the Pope wearing a fancy jacket using AI! How crazy is that? But don't worry, the Pope didn’t actually wear that jacket. It was all computer magic.
Now, AI is like super smart computer stuff that can do things super fast, like write papers and make cool images. Mr. Behrens says it’s great for stuff like making job descriptions and writing ads. But, you know, sometimes it messes up and makes funny pictures of people with extra fingers or weird faces. LOL!
The class is all about figuring out if AI is good or bad for us. Some people think it's awesome for things like medicine and helping out disabled peeps. But others worry it might take our jobs, mess with our elections, or even take over the world. Yikes!
The students in the class are checking out how AI works and trying to understand it. One freshman, Kaila, says it’s helping her learn, not just doing all the work for her. She thinks AI is gonna be everywhere when she graduates. So, we better get used to it, guys!
And guess what? Some professors at Notre Dame are letting students use AI for their homework! But they’re being careful about it. Like, they say, you can use AI for some things, but not everything. They want to make sure students still use their brains and not just rely on the computer brains. Smart move!
There’s this one professor, Ms. Mangione-Lora, who thinks AI is cool for translating stuff and learning new words. But she’s like, “Hey, don’t use it for everything, okay? I want you to think for yourselves!”
And there’s another professor, Mr. Collier, who’s letting students use AI to read books and then write about them. He says it’s making students read more and better. So, AI is like a helpful sidekick, not the superhero.
But not everyone is on the AI train. Some professors, like Mr. Polyzoides and Mr. Bui, are saying, “Uh-uh, no AI in my class!” They think students need to learn things on their own without the computer doing all the work. Old-school style!
Oh, and there’s this person, Ms. Russo, who’s like the AI detective. She’s checking if students are playing fair with AI or cheating. Some students are worried that employers will think they’re lazy if they use too much AI. Gotta be careful, folks!
Anyway, AI is a big deal at Notre Dame, and everyone’s trying to figure out how to use it without going crazy. It’s like a high-tech adventure, and the students want to make sure Notre Dame stays awesome and doesn’t fall behind. So, they’re learning about AI and getting ready for the future. Go, Notre Dame! 🚀
In a format appropriate for a university-level academic journal:
Title: Exploring the Implications of Generative AI in Higher Education: A Case Study at the University of Notre Dame
Abstract:
This article delves into the multifaceted landscape of generative artificial intelligence (AI) within the realm of higher education, focusing on a case study conducted at the University of Notre Dame. Through the lens of the course “Generative AI in the Wild,” led by Professor John Behrens, this study investigates the promise and peril associated with AI technologies. The exploration encompasses diverse dimensions, including economic, social, educational, legal, and ethical considerations.
Introduction:
The emergence of generative AI, exemplified by tools like ChatGPT and DALL-E, has prompted academic institutions to reassess the role of AI in education. Notre Dame undergraduates enrolled in the aforementioned course engage in a comprehensive examination of AI-generated material, aiming to discern the potential impact on various sectors. This article seeks to contribute to the ongoing discourse surrounding the integration of AI in higher education.
AI’s Capabilities and Limitations:
Artificial intelligence, as a simulated manifestation of human intelligence processes, employs algorithms to process vast datasets swiftly. The study acknowledges AI’s ability to generate diverse outputs such as text, photos, videos, and music, closely resembling human-created content. Professor Behrens notes the efficiency of AI in tasks such as crafting job descriptions and advertising content, emphasizing its transformative potential across industries.
AI’s Dual Role: Progress and Concerns:
While AI holds promise for advancements in medical screenings, assistance to the disabled, and climate prediction, concerns arise regarding potential job displacement, the impact of AI on democracy through deep fakes, and the potential loss of control over AI systems. The study recognizes the delicate balance between the positive and negative aspects of AI technologies.
Student Perspectives and Educational Implications:
Students enrolled in the course express a nuanced understanding of AI’s strengths and limitations. Freshman Kaila Bryant notes the instrumental role of AI tools in facilitating learning rather than replacing it. The article emphasizes the necessity of preparing students for an AI-integrated future and acknowledges the inevitable ubiquity of AI in their academic and professional pursuits.
University Policy and Faculty Approaches:
The University of Notre Dame adopts a measured approach to AI integration, aiming to incorporate it as a supplemental tool in education. Faculty members, such as Professor Elena Mangione-Lora, strategically employ AI for specific tasks while preserving the importance of human instruction. The article discusses the challenges of AI-related honor code violations and the University’s commitment to maintaining academic integrity.
Faculty Perspectives and Pedagogical Considerations:
Various faculty members, exemplified by Professor Brian Collier, actively embrace AI in their teaching practices. Collier highlights the positive impact of AI on students’ reading habits, emphasizing the need for AI literacy. Other faculty members, however, approach AI cautiously, emphasizing the importance of students mastering foundational knowledge before relying on AI tools.
Conclusion:
As Notre Dame navigates the integration of generative AI into its educational landscape, this study sheds light on the complex interplay between technology and academia. Acknowledging both the potential benefits and challenges posed by AI, the article underscores the necessity for a balanced, informed approach in preparing students for a future where AI is an integral component of their academic and professional journeys.
In Elizabethan-era English:
Title: Pondering the Marvels and Perils of Artifice: A Tale from the University of Notre Dame
In the Hesburgh Library’s sanctum, a likeness in artifice graces the classroom screen — Pope Francis bedecked in a resplendent, snowy puffer garb, a sacred cross adorning his neck. Yet, the pontiff ne’er posed for such a visage. Conjured by the sorcery of artificial intelligence, this image hath proliferated widely in the digital realm.
On this day, scholars of Notre Dame, under the tutelage of Professor John Behrens ’83, doth scrutinize this image and other machinations wrought by AI. The discipline, Generative AI in the Wild, is a novel, interdisciplinary pursuit wherein students wield ChatGPT, DALL-E, and other arcane AI tools. They share their discoveries, pondering the economic, social, educational, legal, and ethical riddles that accompany such technologies.
The scholars, cognizant that the nefarious “deep fakes,” akin to the image of Pope Francis, shall become more prevalent with the burgeoning of AI tools, muse upon the promises and perils latent in the machinations of this sorcery.
Behold, artificial intelligence, the semblance of human cognition woven by the looms of computation and algorithms. In an instant, it yields texts, images, sounds — all indistinguishable from the creations of mortal minds. It transcribes essays, births research papers, crafts legal tomes, begetteth images, and sires videos, trespassing domains once deemed the sole dominion of human ingenuity.
In the lecture chamber, Professor Behrens declares, “Herein lie sweet spots where ChatGPT excels, where mortals falter.” The sorcery proves adept at concocting job descriptions, weaving sales epistles, and composing text for commerce and advertising. The professor, a sage in the arts of technology and director of the Office of Digital Strategy, prophesies upheavals in industry, heralding disruptions wrought by the inexorable march of AI.
Amidst these auguries, AI emerges as a harbinger of medical advancements, a boon for the infirm, and a diviner of climate patterns. Yet, shadowed by misgivings, observers dread job loss, the subversion of democracy through false imagery, AI-driven warfare, and the specter of an AI that transcends its creators, heralding the doom of humanity.
In the academy, students discern AI’s prowess in mundane tasks but mock its fumbling attempts at generating precise facts or intricate code. A novice, Kaila Bryant, deems this course her enlightenment, finding in AI a guide to learning, rather than a surrogate for toil. A prophecy echoes among the scholars that, ere her graduation, AI shall be an inescapable companion.
Through the annals of time, mortals have oscillated ’twixt fascination and trepidation for nascent technologies, a dance as old as the Industrial Revolution. The Luddites of yore, English textile workers, in disdain of machinery, dismantled the gears that threatened their craft. Similar consternation greeted the pocket calculator, personal computers, and the internet.
In the year of our Lord 2022’s end, ChatGPT, a free AI artefact, emerged unto the public’s cognizance. Educators, divided in sentiment, viewed generative AI as either a deceitful tool or a herald of pedagogic wonders. Already, this sorcery’s dominion is vast, capturing the intrigue of youth. A survey in 2023 found that, among teens familiar with ChatGPT, 19 percent hath wielded it for scholarly pursuits.
Notre Dame’s stewards, with measured countenance, seek to weave AI into the fabric of education, not as an interdict but as a boon. Professors may experiment and decide the role of AI in their dominion. A teaching matron, Elena Mangione-Lora ’98M.A., finds AI a helpful companion in her chamber, guiding translation and vocabulary exercises. Yet, she opines that AI shan’t supplant the presence of a human mentor.
Brian Collier, an ardent advocate, incorporates ChatGPT into his teachings, urging students to read and critique its summaries. His wards, nourished by this union of magic and academia, traverse the tomes with newfound vigor, surpassing their predecessors.
As the autumnal semester unfolds, scholars encounter disputes, forsooth, concerning the ethical use of AI. Ardea Russo ’01M.T.S., ’09PhD., guardian of the faculty honor code, perceives ChatGPT as a potential deceiver. Yet, conversing with colleagues, she glimpses the ardor with which they explore the prospects of generative AI in research and pedagogy.
A proclamation from the university, a herald from its sacred halls, declares the sanctity of engagement with coursework. It condemns the use of generative AI to supplant the rigors of personal engagement and declares such acts as an affront to Notre Dame’s sacred mission.
Henceforth, professors, guided by this proclamation, set forth policies and parameters, discerning the fitting role of AI in their purview. Yet, amidst this scholarly engagement, discord arises as detection tools falter, leading to accusations and complexities in the brave new world of AI.
As the dialogue unfolds, the University beckons its progeny to ponder.