Joe Sabado – Higher Education & Technology Leadership

The content of this training is generated by ChatGPT in response to a prompt provided by Joe Sabado.

Training Purpose: To provide administrative and medical staff at the student health center with an introduction to ChatGPT, a large language model trained by OpenAI, and how it can be used to support student health service-related concerns. The training will also address privacy, appropriate use, and other FERPA/HIPAA concerns related to ChatGPT usage, and offer approaches to responding to student health service-related concerns involving ChatGPT while ensuring confidentiality, privacy, and appropriate use of the tool.

Learning Outcomes:

• Understand what ChatGPT is and how it can be used to support student health service-related concerns.
• Identify potential privacy, appropriate use, and other FERPA/HIPAA concerns related to ChatGPT.
• Develop approaches to responding to student health service-related concerns involving ChatGPT while ensuring confidentiality, privacy, and appropriate use of the tool.

Introduction (5 minutes):

• Greet the participants and introduce yourself as the facilitator.
• Explain the purpose of the training, which is to introduce them to ChatGPT and provide an overview of the training agenda.

ChatGPT Overview (10 minutes):

• Explain what ChatGPT is and how it works.
• Discuss the potential benefits of using ChatGPT for student health service-related concerns.
• Provide examples of how other organizations have successfully integrated ChatGPT into their operations.

Case Studies (30 minutes):

• Divide participants into groups and distribute case studies related to ChatGPT usage in student health service.
• Each group will analyze the case study and identify potential privacy, appropriate use, and other FERPA/HIPAA concerns.
• After analyzing the case study, each group will report its findings to the larger group and engage in a discussion about the best ways to address those concerns.

Approaches to Responding to Concerns (10 minutes):

• Provide some approaches to responding to student health service-related concerns involving ChatGPT.
• Highlight the importance of confidentiality, privacy, and appropriate use of the tool.
• Encourage participants to share their experiences and suggestions for dealing with these types of concerns.

Wrap-up (5 minutes):

• Summarize the key takeaways from the training.
• Encourage participants to ask questions or provide feedback.
• Provide any additional resources, if available.

=============================================================

Email me at joepsabado@gmail.com for a facilitator’s guide for this training which includes scenarios for the case study section and details for each section.

I have yet to read many articles on how higher education student conduct officers should respond to ChatGPT-related academic and behavioral misconduct incidents. So, to get some general ideas on the topic, I prompted ChatGPT with ideas on what a 1-hour training to introduce ChatGPT, the relevance to their jobs, and potential approaches they may have when such incidents arise.

This blog post aims to:

1. Share a 1-hour training session plan that can be used as a baseline for others to adapt.
2. Illustrate the utility of ChatGPT as a learning tool.
3. Use ChatGPT to develop training activities.

One important note: The value of a knowledgeable instructor/practical facilitator who can lead inclusive, diverse, and productive discussions cannot be understated. For this interactive training, the approach of “guide by the side,” whereby the teacher acts as a facilitator or guide for the learning process, is more effective than “sage on the stage,” whereby the teacher lectures, and the students listen and take notes.

Learning Outcomes/Objectives:

• Define what ChatGPT is and how it works
• Understand the potential impact of ChatGPT on academic and behavioral misconducts
• Analyze case studies involving ChatGPT and academic or behavioral misconducts, and recommend appropriate responses
• Develop a plan of action to respond to academic and behavioral misconducts involving ChatGPT

By the end of this training, student conduct officers should be able to:

• Define what ChatGPT is and explain how it works, and recognize its potential applications in various fields
• Understand the potential impact of ChatGPT on academic and behavioral misconducts, and recognize its relevance to student conduct officers’ work
• Analyze case studies involving ChatGPT and academic or behavioral misconducts, and recommend appropriate responses, taking into account ethical considerations and best practices
• Develop a plan of action to respond to academic and behavioral misconducts involving ChatGPT, using guidelines and best practices, and involving AI experts and stakeholders as necessary

Time Allocation:

I. Introduction (5 mins)

• Welcome and introductions
• Brief explanation of the purpose of the training session
• Overview of what ChatGPT is and how it works

II. Importance and Relevance (10 mins)

• Discuss why it is important for student conduct officers to be aware of ChatGPT
• Explain how ChatGPT can be relevant to academic and behavioral misconducts
• Provide examples of how ChatGPT can impact academic and behavioral misconducts

III. Case Study Activities (30 mins)

• Divide the group into small groups
• Provide each group with a case study activity involving ChatGPT and academic or behavioral misconduct
• Allow each group time to analyze the case study and discuss potential responses to the situation
• Reconvene the group and allow each group to present their analysis and recommended response

IV. Responding to Misconduct (10 mins)

• Discuss potential approaches to responding to academic and behavioral misconducts involving ChatGPT
• Provide guidelines for investigating and addressing potential misconduct involving ChatGPT
• Discuss the importance of involving AI experts and developing policies to prevent future misconduct

V. Conclusion and Learning Outcomes (5 mins)

• Recap the main points covered in the training
• Reiterate the importance of being aware of ChatGPT and its potential impact on academic and behavioral misconducts
• Provide learning outcomes for the training

==========================================================

It is imperative that student service practitioners, including student conduct officers, engage in learning about ChatGPT to gain competencies to better serve and prevent harm to students and other campus constituents. Ill-informed policies and practices implemented do have social justice implications.

While a significant portion of the conversations related to ChatGPT center around academic integrity and teaching/learning, higher education institutions consist of many areas/capabilities in the learning and teaching, research, and enabling capabilities that warrant explorations on the implications and utilities of this technology. 

Email me at joepsabado@gmail.com for a facilitator’s guide for this training which includes scenarios for the case study section and details for each section.

What are the social justice implications of ChatGPT and institutions’ responses to the tool?

I wrote in this blog post about information technology (and technology in general) and social justice that these concepts are not discussed enough. In that blog post and for this one, I use the concept offered by Tyler and Smith (1998) of social justice, which involves distributive and procedural. The authors defined distributive justice as the “distribution of limited goods and resources based on principles of equity, need, or equality” and procedural justice as the “influence during the decision-making process.”

The varied responses of learning institutions to ChatGPT, including outright banning the tool, such as New York City schools, Fairfax County Public Schools, Fairfax County Public Schools, and Los Angeles Unified School District some exploring the potential benefits by incorporating it into their classroom curriculum like Prof Ethan Mollick got me thinking to the idea of the impact of ChatGPT itself as well as the responses and their implications to social justice in higher education. In an almost inevitable future world where digital competencies involve AI, and when some high schools/universities ban these tools, does the digital divide become an issue?

Coincidentally, a colleague asked me, “could you point me toward articles or resources where universities are considering the DEI implications of OpenAI?” I may need to do more research across institutions to examine faculty guidance offered by higher education institutions. Still, at a glance, the available guidance provided by institutions I have reviewed focuses on the ethical use of AI, specifically academic dishonesty and plagiarism. Still, I did not read mentions of the implications of DEI.

Regarding equity and equality, folks with disabilities and advocates have expressed concerns about banning ChatGPT and AI. This article provides an example, “AI has tremendous potential, especially when it comes to making learning materials more accessible … it makes more sense for universities to embrace the technology,” she said, adding that returning to pen and paper “seems a bit backward.”

Another article highlighted the disproportionate impact of banning ChatGPT on folks with disabilities,

“Taking the hasty stance of rigid gatekeeping in response to AI proceeds down a path of universal dismantlement, the opposite of universal design. In universal dismantlement, imposed restrictions on technology, which may have a marginal impact on the population in general, would have a graver effect on those with disabilities.”

Suppose higher education institutions are to incorporate ChatGPT into student learning and teaching, research, and administrative functions. In that case, those tasked with designing and implementing the technology must ensure it does not inhibit specific populations’ ability to fulfill their “jobs to be done.”

Given the impact of ChatGPT and the responses to the tool, it is imperative for higher education decision-makers, faculty, and staff that provide service not only to our students but other stakeholders to understand the benefits and drawbacks of this disruptive tool. They also need to meaningfully involve those impacted by their decisions to participate and have input in proposed policies and practices. Introducing policies to combat unethical use of the technology may inadvertently introduce more harm to some populations they serve.

Reference:

Taylor, S.H. “The Impact of College on the Development of Tolerance.” NASPA Journal, 1998, 34, 281-295.

Based on the conversations online and institutions’ responses to ChatGPT, it is a technology that merits serious consideration concerning student academic experience and teaching/learning. My observation of the concerns around ChatGPT and academic concerns and possibilities led me to think of ways to frame the applicability and utility of ChatGPT in higher education. I’m reminded of Arthur W. Chickering and Zelda F. Gamson’s “Seven Principles for Good Practice in Undergraduate Education” to frame ChatGPT.

Here are the seven principles:

1. Encourage contact between students and faculty
2. Develop reciprocity and cooperation among students
3. Encourage active learning
4. Give prompt feedback
5. Emphasize time on task
6. Communicate high expectations
7. Respect diverse talents and ways of learning

I have yet to explore whether ChatGPT is even applicable to these principles. However, if it is, what kinds of questions should we consider as educators and higher education administrators? I suppose one could ask the following questions:

1. How can ChatGPT be used to encourage contact between students and faculty? Should it be?
2. How can ChatGPT be used to develop reciprocity and cooperation among students? Should it be?
3. In what ways can ChatGPT be used to encourage active learning? Should it be?
4. In what ways can ChatGPT be used to give prompt feedback? Should it be?
5. In what ways can ChatGPT be used to emphasize time on task? Should it be?
6. In what ways can ChatGPT be used to communicate high expectations? Should it be?
7. In what ways can ChatGPT be used to respect diverse talents and ways of learning? Should it be?

I prompted ChatGPT to provide examples of how ChatGPT can be applied in higher education using Chickering and Gamson’s “Seven Principles for Good Practice in Undergraduate Education.” Here is the response:

1. Encourage contact between students and faculty: ChatGPT could facilitate communication between students and faculty by providing personalized responses to student inquiries, scheduling virtual office hours, and sending reminders about upcoming assignments or deadlines.
2. Develop reciprocity and cooperation among students: ChatGPT could help promote collaboration among students by facilitating group discussions, suggesting peer review activities, and providing resources on effective teamwork.
3. Encourage active learning: ChatGPT could recommend interactive learning activities such as simulations, games, and case studies, as well as offer guidance on how to create engaging learning experiences that promote active participation and critical thinking.
4. Give prompt feedback: ChatGPT could provide real-time feedback on assignments, assessments, and quizzes, as well as suggest ways for students to improve their performance.
5. Emphasize time on task: ChatGPT could help students manage their time effectively by providing time management strategies, scheduling tools, and recommendations for prioritizing tasks.
6. Communicate high expectations: ChatGPT could set clear expectations for assignments, assessments, and course outcomes, as well as provide resources to help students meet those expectations.
7. Respect diverse talents and ways of learning: ChatGPT could provide resources and support for diverse learners, including visual, auditory, and kinesthetic learners, as well as students with disabilities or other challenges.

What are your thoughts on whether ChatGPT as it relates to “Seven Principles for Good Practice in Undergraduate Education”? Do you agree with ChatGPT’s suggestions?

Based on the conversations online and institutions’ responses to ChatGPT, it is a technology that merits serious consideration concerning student academic experience and teaching/learning. My observation of the concerns around ChatGPT and academic concerns and possibilities led me to think of ways to frame the applicability and utility of ChatGPT in higher education. I’m reminded of Arthur W. Chickering and Zelda F. Gamson’s “Seven Principles for Good Practice in Undergraduate Education” to frame ChatGPT.

Here are the seven principles:

1. Encourage contact between students and faculty
2. Develop reciprocity and cooperation among students
3. Encourage active learning
4. Give prompt feedback
5. Emphasize time on task
6. Communicate high expectations
7. Respect diverse talents and ways of learning

I have yet to explore whether ChatGPT is even applicable to these principles. However, if it is, what kinds of questions should we consider as educators and higher education administrators? I suppose one could ask the following questions:

1. How can ChatGPT be used to encourage contact between students and faculty? Should it be?
2. How can ChatGPT be used to develop reciprocity and cooperation among students? Should it be?
3. In what ways can ChatGPT be used to encourage active learning? Should it be?
4. In what ways can ChatGPT be used to give prompt feedback? Should it be?
5. In what ways can ChatGPT be used to emphasize time on task? Should it be?
6. In what ways can ChatGPT be used to communicate high expectations? Should it be?
7. In what ways can ChatGPT be used to respect diverse talents and ways of learning? Should it be?

I prompted ChatGPT to provide examples of how ChatGPT can be applied in higher education using Chickering and Gamson’s “Seven Principles for Good Practice in Undergraduate Education.” Here is the response:

1. Encourage contact between students and faculty: ChatGPT could facilitate communication between students and faculty by providing personalized responses to student inquiries, scheduling virtual office hours, and sending reminders about upcoming assignments or deadlines.
2. Develop reciprocity and cooperation among students: ChatGPT could help promote collaboration among students by facilitating group discussions, suggesting peer review activities, and providing resources on effective teamwork.
3. Encourage active learning: ChatGPT could recommend interactive learning activities such as simulations, games, and case studies, as well as offer guidance on how to create engaging learning experiences that promote active participation and critical thinking.
4. Give prompt feedback: ChatGPT could provide real-time feedback on assignments, assessments, and quizzes, as well as suggest ways for students to improve their performance.
5. Emphasize time on task: ChatGPT could help students manage their time effectively by providing time management strategies, scheduling tools, and recommendations for prioritizing tasks.
6. Communicate high expectations: ChatGPT could set clear expectations for assignments, assessments, and course outcomes, as well as provide resources to help students meet those expectations.
7. Respect diverse talents and ways of learning: ChatGPT could provide resources and support for diverse learners, including visual, auditory, and kinesthetic learners, as well as students with disabilities or other challenges.

What are your thoughts on whether ChatGPT as it relates to “Seven Principles for Good Practice in Undergraduate Education”? Do you agree with ChatGPT’s suggestions?