Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
16 August 2024 Photo Supplied
Dr Peet van Aardt
Dr Peet van Aardt is the head of the UFS Writing Centre and the Coordinator of the Initiative for Creative African Narratives (iCAN).

Opinion article by Dr Peet van Aardt, Centre for Teaching and Learning and Head of the UFS Writing Centre, University of the Free State. 


The use and permittance of artificial intelligence tools such as ChatGPT at the University of the Free State (UFS) should be discouraged, writes Dr Peet van Aardt.

A decade ago, academics were encouraged to find ways to incorporate social media platforms like Facebook and Twitter in their teaching. Seeing as students were spending so much time on these platforms, the idea was that we need to take the classroom to them. Until they found out young people do not use social media to study, but rather to create and share entertainment content.

During the late 2000s, News24.com, the biggest news website in Africa, went on a mission to nurture and expand what was known as “community journalism” because everybody started owning smartphones, the news outlet’s leadership thought it was the opportunity to provide a platform for people to share photos, videos and stories of news events that took place around them. Until they realised that the vast majority of people didn’t want to contribute to journalism; they merely wanted to consume it.

Lest we assume students will use AI in a responsible and productive manner, at the UFS Writing Centre we find that students over-rely on ChatGPT in their assignments and essays. We should do everything in our power to discourage its use because it threatens what we do at a university on three levels.

It’s an educational issue

There are five main academic literacies we want to teach our students: reading, writing, speaking, listening and critical thinking. When students prompt ChatGPT to write their essay for them, immediately the reading and writing literacies are discarded because the student does not write the essay, nor do they read any source material that would help them form an argument. Critical thinking goes out the window, because it is merely a copy-and-paste job they are performing. And speaking? We see in the Writing Centre that students who use ChatGPT cannot discuss their “work”. The student voice is being killed.

There are lecturers who take the approach of motivating students to use prompted content from ChatGPT in order to critique and discuss the AI output. This is fine, should the students be operating at a level where their academic literacies have been established. In short: for postgraduate use it might be acceptable. Undergraduate students need to go through the process of becoming scholars and master their subject matter before they can be expected to critique it. It is basic pedagogy, and our duty as staff at the UFS, because it aligns with the Graduate Attribute of Critical Thinking.

It’s a moral issue

In addition to the academic literacies we attempt to instil in our students are attributes of ethical reasoning and written communication. The fact that AI tools “scrape” the internet for content without any consent from the content creators means that it is committing plagiarism. It is theft – “the greatest heist in history” as some refer to it. Do we want our students to develop digital skills and competencies on immoral grounds? Because often this is the reason given when students are encouraged or allowed to use AI: “The technology is there, and therefore we must learn to go with the flow and let the students to use it.” By this reasoning one can make the argument that the UFS rugby team (go, Shimlas!) must use performance-enhancing substances because it will make the players faster, stronger and “the technology is there”.

Academics also face a moral dilemma as there seems to brew a view that fire should be fought with fire: that AI can assist and even lead in tasks such as plagiarism detection, assessment and content development. But fighting fire with fire just burns down the house. Let us not look to AI to lessen our workload.

It’s an economic issue

Technology in education should be used to level the playing field. Companies develop online tools with a primary goal of making money – despite what the bandwagon passengers in the East and West promise us. Their operations cost a lot of money, and so they release free versions to get people hooked on it, and then they develop better products and place them behind a paywall. What this then means is that students who can afford subscription costs get access to the premium product, while the poor students get left behind. How can we assess two students who cannot make use of the same version of a tool? This will widen the gap in performance between students from different economic backgrounds. And consider the deletion of the authentic student voice (as alluded to earlier), these AI tools just represent a new platform for colonisation and therefore have no place in our institution.

OK, so what?

Lecturers who want advice on how to detect overreliance on AI tools can have a look at this video, which forms part of the AI Wayfinder Series – a brilliant project by the UFS’s Interdisciplinary Centre for Digital Futures and the Digital Scholarship Centre. These centres also have other helpful resources to check out.

But as an institution we need to produce a policy on how to deal with the threat and possibilities of AI. (Because in society and in certain disciplines it can make a contribution – just not for undergraduate studies in a university context.) Currently, a team that includes staff from the Faculty of Law and that of Economic and Management Sciences is busy drafting guidelines which departments can implement. Then, after a while, a review of these guidelines-in-practice can be done to lead us on the path of establishing a concrete policy.

If we as educators consider the facts that the use of AI tools impede the development of academic literacies (on undergraduate level), it silences local, authentic voices and it can create further economic division among our student community, we should not promote its use at our institution. Technology is not innovative if it does not improve something.

Dr Peet van Aardt is the Head of the UFS Writing Centre and the Coordinator of the Initiative for Creative African Narratives (iCAN). Before joining the UFS in 2014 he was the Community Editor of News24.com. 

News Archive

Mathatha Tsedu to deliver King Moshoeshoe lecture
2009-06-29

Mathatha Tsedu 
The former Editor of City Press, Mathatha Tsedu, will deliver the Second King Moshoeshoe Memorial Lecture at the University of the Free State in Bloemfontein on Wednesday, 9 September 2009.

The King Moshoeshoe Memorial Lecture series are an initiative of the University of the Free State to honour the leadership legacy of King Moshoeshoe I, founder of the Basotho nation. The lecture series aim to provide a platform for debate about the key challenges of nation-building, reconciliation and leadership facing our country and the African continent.

In 2004 the UFS produced a documentary on the life of King Moshoeshoe I as part of the project to pay tribute to this great African leader. The documentary was screened numerous times on SABC TV.

Later in 2006, the inaugural King Moshoeshoe Memorial Lecture was delivered by Prof Njabulo Ndebele, former vice-chancellor of the University of Cape Town.

Mr Tsedu is one of South Africa’s foremost journalists and social commentators. He will speak on the topic, “When globalisation ties the fate of the Maluti to that of the ice caps on the Alps, what does Morena Moshoeshoe teach us about leadership today?”

Mr Tsedu has received several awards, including the Nat Nakasa Award for Courageous Journalism in 2000 as well as the Shanduka Lifetime Achievers Award in 2007.

A graduate of the University of the Witwatersrand, he started his career in journalism as a bureau reporter for the Sowetan in 1978 responsible for the then Northern Transvaal. Later Mr Tsedu became Political Editor of the Sowetan, the Deputy Editor of The Star as well as the Deputy Editor of the Sunday Independent and Deputy Chief Executive of SABC News.

He has also been the Editor of two major Sunday newspapers, the Sunday Times and City Press and is currently the Head of the Journalism Academy at the Media24 group.

Mr Tsedu is the Chairperson of The African Editors Forum and a Council Member of the South African National Editors’ Forum (SANEF). He has addressed various organisations on journalism in South Africa, including the International Federation of Journalists; the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions; the Botswana Journalist Association; the Zimbabwe Union of Journalists; the Kenya Union of Journalists; and the Union of African Journalists.

He was an active trade unionist and national executive member of the Media Workers’ Association of South Africa. He was detained several times, banned and restricted to Seshego in the Northern Province from 1981 to 1986.

Mr Tsedu is also a short story writer with several of his stories published in various magazines. He was awarded a prestigious Nieman Fellowship in 1996/97 to study at Harvard University in the United States of America.

Media Release
Issued by: Lacea Loader
Assistant Director: Media Liaison
Tel: 051 401 2584
Cell: 083 645 2454
E-mail: loaderl.stg@ufs.ac.za  
29 June 2009

We use cookies to make interactions with our websites and services easy and meaningful. To better understand how they are used, read more about the UFS cookie policy. By continuing to use this site you are giving us your consent to do this.

Accept