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

Conference: Expanded ARV treatment
2005-03-02

VENUE: University of the Free State, Bloemfontein, South Africa
DATE: 30 March 2005 - 1 April 2005

  • ARV Programme as on 24Feb Download Word document
     
  • Programme Special events Download Word document


    Official web site www.fshealth.gov.za/subsites/arvc

     


    Rationale for the Conference
    At the time of the planned Conference, much ground would have been covered, both in the Free State and in South Africa, in respect of the expanded public sector ARV treatment programme in respect of research, experiences in practice, training of staff, treatment of patients, lessons learned, successes and failures, etc. The time would then be quite opportune to share these in a systematic manner with other provinces and countries, as well as with the large variety of stakeholders and role players in the ARV and related domains, be they academics and researchers, policy makers and service/facility managers, the variety of caregivers, and the community organisations and affected patients.

The Conference and current research
The proposed Conference is, firstly, directly linked to the current research on the public sector roll-out of ARV treatment in the Free State conducted by several research institutions (e.g. CIET, CHSR&D, UCT Lung Institute). Secondly, the Conference could and would serve as a forum for other research groups in the country and further a field to report and share knowledge and experiences on ARV treatment and related initiatives. Lastly, the Conference will stage a golden opportunity for researchers and scientists, on the one hand, and policy makers, managers, and caregivers (as knowledge users), on the other hand, to engage in cross-disciplinary discourse on this mutual and topical theme.

Theme of Conference
Expanded ARV treatment in the Free State: sharing experiences

Focus
The focus is primarily on public sector ARV treatment in the Free State, but also initiatives/activities/perspectives of relevance to the Free State elsewhere in the country at large and further a field, as well as relevant ARV initiatives in the public, private, NGO and FBO sectors. Bear in mind, however, that ARV treatment is but part of a much more comprehensive approach to HIV and AIDS. The Conference will, therefore, not narrowly focus on the ARV treatment programme only. The broader context, other relevant dimensions, and a comprehensive approach to the challenges of HIV, AIDS and TB are of equal importance.

The purpose of the Conference
Enhance meaningful exchange, mutual understanding and collaboration among researchers, scientists, policy makers, managers and practitioners in the field of ARV treatment and related fields.

Share experiences in the various spheres of ARV treatment and related spheres (policy, management, practice, research, training, public-private-civil society sectors).

Record, reflect and report on the establishment of the ARV treatment programme in the Free State, and in within the context of the comprehensive HIV/AIDS programme.

Disseminate important research results on ARV treatment and related themes to health policy makers, managers, practitioners, communities and to the research community.

Stimulate discourse among various disciplines and various stakeholders/role players involved in ARV treatment and related programmes.

Sensitise and acquaint researchers to the requirements of policy makers, managers and practitioners in respect of ARV treatment and related fields.

Facilitate the implementation of research results in ARV treatment policy, programmes and practice.

Dissemination of Conference-related information
Information generated during the Conference could feed into policy, management and practice of ARV treatment, the training accompanying such programme, and the existing body of knowledge. After the Conference the information will be disseminated via the Internet and by scientific and popular publications.

Date and duration
Set for 30 & 31 March & 1 April 2005; to commence at 09:00 on the first day (30 March) and to end at 16:30 (1 April) the third day.

Format and scope of Conference
Alternating plenary, parallel sessions and debates focused on topical issues and interest groups. The Conference will strive to be maximally interactive and participative.

Themes and topics to cover:

  • Policy, management and health services/practice (various levels and contexts – clinical treatment, information, IT systems, pharmacy, laboratories, nutrition)
     
  • Research covering all relevant disciplines and diverse dimensions of ARV treatment and related themes
  • Training and evaluation of training
  • Patients, communities and civil society organisations
  • Public, private, NGO, FBO initiatives and partnerships

Emphasis will be on the Free State, however, with of significant involvement from other provinces, SADC countries, and countries further a field. The thrust will be to export lessons and experiences from the Free State, but also to import lessons and experiences from other provinces, countries and sectors.

Presenters
Key presenters from the Free State, other provinces, South Africa, from the private, FBO and NGO sectors, and from several other countries

Delegates
About half of the delegates will be Free State stakeholders and role players (all levels and all contexts). The other half will be role players and stakeholders in the ARV and related fields from other provinces, the national level, and other countries, as well as from the private, public and non-governmental sectors.

Focused workshops
Provision will be made for half-a-day or one-day workshop initiatives on the third day (1 April 2005).

Enquiries
For more information please contact:

Prof Dingie van Rensburg
Centre for Health Systems Research & Development
University of the Free State
PO Box 339
Bloenfontein
SOUTH AFRICA
9300

Contact:
Carin van Vuuren
Conference Organiser
Centre for Health Systems Research & Development
University of the Free State
P.O.Box 339
Bloemfontein
South Africa
9300
Tel +27 (0) 51 401 2181
Fax +27 (0) 51 4480370
Cell 0832932890
e-mail: arvconference.hum@mail.uovs.ac.za

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