Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items

AI Tools in Higher Education: Go prompt yourself

16 August 2024 Photo Supplied

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

Power interruptions: Information for internal communication

2008-01-31

As part of the UFS’s commitment to address load shedding, the management would like to communicate the following:

The UFS mainly deals with the power interruptions by way of (a) the possible installation of equipment (e.g. generators) and (b) operational arrangements to ensure the functioning of the UFS in spite of power interruptions.

During the past week progress was made on both fronts. The information that follows resulted from a meeting of a task team of Physical Resources led by Mr Nico Janse van Rensburg, which took place on Monday 28 January (this task team naturally focuses on physical solutions) and a discussion by Exco on Wednesday 30 January 2008. Exco discussed the recommendations of the mentioned task team in respect of physical aspects, as well as the operational arrangements proposed by faculties.

Physical solutions

A Main Campus

1. New emergency power installations already approved:

Last week Exco gave its approval for the design and installation of emergency power equipment in all the large lecture-hall complexes to proceed immediately.

In all these cases

load surveys have been completed and a start has been made with the ordering of equipment and the process of appointing contractors. (Exco approved the adjustment of normal tender procedures in an attempt to expedite completion.)
generators with 20-30% more capacity than required for the current load are being ordered.
provision is being made for the connection of lights and at least one wall plug to the emergency power.
the expected construction time is 16 weeks (except in the case of the Flippie Groenewoud Building where it is 6 weeks).

The above-mentioned concerns lecture halls/ venues in the following buildings: Examination Centre, Flippie Groenewoud Building, Stabilis, Genmin and the Agriculture Building.

As far as the Agriculture Building is concerned, a larger generator (larger than required for lecture venues only) is being ordered in view of simultaneously providing essential research equipment (refrigerators, ovens, glasshouses) with emergency power within 16 weeks.

2. Investigation into the optimal utilisation of present emergency power installations

All the emergency power systems are being investigated on the basis of a list compiled in 2006 to determine whether excess capacity is available and whether it is possible to connect additional essential equipment or lights to it.

The electrical engineer warns as follows:
“Staff members must under no circumstances overload present emergency power points.

A typical example of this is a laboratory with 10 power points of which 2 points are emergency power outlets. Normally a fridge and freezer would, for example, be plugged into the two emergency power points, but now, with long load-shedding interruptions, a considerably larger number of appliances are being plugged into the power point by means of multi-sockets and extension cords. In the end the effect of such connections will accumulate at the emergency generator, which will then create a greater danger of it being overloaded and tripping, in other words, no emergency power will then be available.”

3. Requests and needs addressed directly to Physical Resources or reported to Exco via the line managers.

All the physical needs and requests addressed directly to Physical Resources or submitted to Exco via the line managers are being listed, classified and considered technically in view of their being discussed by the task team on Monday 11 February.
The information will (a) lead to recommendations to Exco regarding possible additional urgent emergency power installations, and (b) be used in the comprehensive investigation into the UFS’s preparedness for and management of long power interruptions.

Requests that can easily be complied with immediately and that fit into the general strategy will indeed be dealt with as soon as possible.

4. Purchase of loose-standing equipment: light, small, loose-standing generators, UPSs as solutions to/ aids during power interruptions

Exco approved that

a) faculties and support services accept responsibility themselves for the funding and purchase of loose equipment such as, for example battery lights, should they regard these as essential.
b) UPSs (uninterruptible power supplies) that faculties and support services wish to purchase to combat the detrimental effect of unexpected power interruptions on computer equipment) can (as at present) be purchased from own funds via Computer Services.
c) UPSs (uninterruptible power supplies) that faculties and support services wish to purchase to combat the detrimental effect of unexpected power interruptions on other types of equipment can normally be purchased from own funds with the consent of the line manager concerned.
Note: Please just make sure of the appropriateness of the equipment for a specific situation: it is not a power supply that can bridge a two-hour power interruption.)
d) small, loose-standing generators can be purchased from own funds via Physical Resources and installed under their supervision.
e) laptop computers can , where necessary, be purchased from own budgets. The availability of second-hand laptop computers must be taken into account.

B Vista

No major problems have been reported to date. The situation is being monitored and will be managed according to need. The same guidelines that apply to the Main Campus will naturally also apply to the Vista Campus.

C Qwaqwa

The situation is receiving attentions and solutions have already been found for most problems.

D General

1. All-inclusive project
A comprehensive investigation into the UFS’s preparedness for and management of long power interruptions will be launched as soon as possible. Available capacity will be utilised first to alleviate the immediate need. The needs assessment to which all faculties and support services have already contributed is already an important building block of the larger project.

2. Building and construction projects currently in the planning and implementation phase
The need for emergency power for projects such as the new Computer Laboratory is being investigated proactively and will be addressed in a suitable manner.

3. Liaison with Centlec
Attempts at direct and continuous liaison are continuing in an attempt to accommodate the unique needs of the UFS.

4. HESA meeting and liaison with other universities
A representative of the UFS will attend a meeting of all higher education institutions on 11 February. The meeting is being arranged by HESA (Higher Education South Africa) to discuss the implications for the sector, the management of risks and the sector’s response to government.

5. Internal communication
It is the intention to communicate internally after every meeting of the task team, which will take place on Mondays. Strategic Communication will assist in this regard.

Back

Economic and Management Sciences

Education

Health Sciences

The Humanities

Law

Natural and Agricultural Sciences

Theology and Religion

Open Distance Learning

Business School

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