ChatGPT and AI Chatbots: A Discursive Part of the Zeitgeist
Tanjin Ashraf
PhD Candidate, Australian Catholic University
In January 2023, the JCACS Musers planned on writing a series on ChatGPT and AI chatbots because it was novel to us, and we were excited to talk about it. In just two months, the number of discourses on ChatGPT has blown up, and I noticed countless pieces being shared about it on LinkedIn, Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, etc. My friends and I have also been discussing the implications for ChatGPT and the education sector, with sentiments ranging from nihilistic tremors to optimistic glee.
I was most interested in two aspects of ChatGPT. First, what does “GPT” even stand for? Apparently, it stands for GUID partition table and GUID means globally unique identifiers, none of which still make any sense to me. However, rather than focusing on this rabbit hole of acronyms, I want to explore my second interest: the discourses on ChatGPT and education, and the implications of producing these discourses itself.
The definition of discourse varies among scholars. Some believe discourse is a method of using discussions to transmit language or represent certain knowledge bases and beliefs. I borrow French philosopher Michel Foucault’s (1972) view on discourse, where he asserts that discourse itself produces reality and possibilities. Hence, discourse does not represent reality; discourse is reality. Here is a brief overview of some discourses that have been emerging on ChatGPT and education:
- ChatGPT is a negative disruption to education and needs to be stopped (here and here): ChatGPT is a “threat” or “plague” for the higher education system. There is significant fear that students will use ChatGPT to write their assignments for them because it has the ability to produce sophisticated essays, stories, etc.
- We need to find ways to stop students from cheating using ChatGPT (here and here: Students will inevitably use ChatGPT to cheat on their tests and assignments, which is problematized by the discourse previously mentioned. Some cited strategies include going back to in-person assignments and tests, educating staff about ChatGPT, formulating pertinent policies, or creating formative rather than summative assessments.
- Work with ChatGPT not against it (here and here): Instead of treating ChatGPT as a mortal enemy, some suggest finding ways to leverage its abilities in enhancing existing procedures. Some strategies include using ChatGPT to create essay outlines, evaluate system flaws to build critical thinking skills, or provide automated student feedback so teachers can save time and devote their energy to other aspects of teaching.
I want to note that I did a very quick search and this is not a comprehensive outlook on the discourses produced on ChatGPT and education; I just wanted to provide a taste of the extant discussions that illuminate the diversified range of emergent discourses. Also, my commentary is not on the validity or legitimacy of these discourses — that is another discussion for another day. Rather, I am intrigued by the enactment of discourse itself. I’m sure Foucault would agree with the adage, we are what we discuss (I took the creative liberty to change the phrase a bit).
The evolving discourses on ChatGPT are formulating entangling problems and possibilities. For example, if the discourse that ChatGPT is a threat to student learning continues to percolate, then that can potentially responsibilize teachers to create methods to ensure students are not cheating. On the other hand, the discourse on working with ChatGPT can provide teachers with opportunities to develop innovative pedagogies. Hence, in order to understand and shape the future of ChatGPT and AI Chatbots, we need to be aware of the discourses — and in turn reality — we are producing.
A significant aspect of cognizance is understanding the ethical creation, implementation, usage, and discoursing of ChatGPT. American physicist Karen Barad (2007) coined the term ethico-onto-epistem-ology which simply means humans, nonhumans, and discourses are inevitably entangled in creating knowledge and existence, and these entities have an ethical responsibility to be mindful of how they impact each other. In the education sector in particular, where there is a common belief that maintaining ethical standards is imperative to learning and wellbeing, it is important to be aware of how the discourses surrounding ChatGPT and education have ethical ramifications on all and everything involved. As ChatGPT and AI chatbots are becoming part of the zeitgeist, we will need to be deliberate and vigilant of the discourses we are producing and are a part of.
References
Barad, K. (2007). Meeting the universe halfway: Quantum physics and the entanglement of matter and meaning. Duke University Press.
Foucault, M. (1972). (A. M. Sheridan Smith, Trans.). Archeology of knowledge. Tavistock Publications Limited. (Original Work published 1972).
