How Does ChatGPT Fit Into the Northside Classroom?
Students at Northside are seeing ChatGPT appear more and more often in their academic lives. They might use it to generate study questions before a big test or run their essays through for a quick grammar check before turning them in. Maybe their teachers have even given them assignments that instruct them to use it, or maybe their teacher’s policy is strictly against it. This is a strange new reality faced by Northsiders and students all over the country.
ChatGPT belongs to a broader category of technology known as generative AI. Generative AI encompasses all forms of artificial intelligence that can generate new content, such as images, text, ideas, solutions to problems, or data.
ChatGPT is a specific form of generative AI: a chatbot developed by Open AI that generates text in response to our inputs, questions, or prompts in a way that mimics a text conversation. Other chatbots and forms of conversational AI exist, but ChatGPT is by far the most widely used for everyday purposes.
It was launched and released to the public in November 2022, and within days, it had amassed over 1 million users. But ChatGPT has caught on, particularly among high school students.
Much discourse surrounds students’ use of ChatGPT and other generative AI tools for academic purposes. The use of AI is a complicated issue, and because the technology is so new and has gained traction so fast, there is still much uncertainty—among students, teachers, and administrators alike—about the ChatGPT policy.
Some school districts, like the Los Angeles Unified School District and New York Public Schools, have briefly or permanently banned student access to ChatGPT on school devices. Meanwhile, other school districts, like Bloomington Public Schools in Minnesota, have advised teachers to embrace AI tools for teaching and learning purposes. They have even incorporated computer science and generative AI courses into their mandatory curriculum. (According to MPR News and Forbes)
CPS and AI Policy
Chicago Public Schools recently created a district-wide policy regarding students’ use of generative AI. CPS encourages students to use approved and vetted generative AI tools for collaboration, creativity, and learning (for example, generating practice problems or summarizing group discussions). However, CPS asserts that students must first get permission from their teachers to use CPS to complete any in-class assignment.
CPS said, “Students should submit work that is fundamentally their own.” If generative AI is used to assist with an assignment, the student should indicate how and when it was used, and it should always be used ethically. If these guidelines are not followed, the student violates the CPS Code of Conduct and is subject to consequences determined on a case-by-case basis.
College Board and AI Policy
College Board, an educational behemoth that students all over the country interact with, specifically for their AP classes and SAT testing, has its own policies concerning student usage of generative AI. Their policies differ depending on the course. But overall, the College Board asserts that students must use generative AI ethically, responsibly, and for specific purposes only. These purposes may include confirming their understanding of a text or content, checking the grammar of their writing, exploring topics for projects, or performing initial research. College Board emphasizes the importance of students engaging directly with sources and providing original perspectives, communications, work, and ideas.
However, in addition to national and district-wide policy, different educators and departments have varying opinions on introducing ChatGPT into the classroom.
Students also have their own agendas and can easily access generative AI resources. Should teachers condone student use of AI or condemn it? Should schools teach students to use AI positively or develop fundamental skills independently of technology?
This global issue is of enormous importance in shaping the future of education, and it all boils down to individual classroom settings. Even within the Northside community, we contribute a valuable perspective to worldwide conversations about AI. So, how does ChatGPT fit into the Northside classroom?
Teachers and Students Perspectives on AI in Schools
Junior Cecilie Garcia occasionally uses ChatGPT to check her work in math and science classes. She says it is “mostly negative in the classroom because it can decrease our personal motivation.”
Sophomore Sabina Anderson feels differently, saying, “I think it’s an overall positive because it helps me better understand the assignments and work, and it’s good for inspiration.”
Veronica Motawi, a junior, uses ChatGPT “to study, mostly by generating free response question prompts for APUSH and things like that.” She said, “I probably only use it once every 6 months for academic purposes.”
On the other hand, Junior Amberly Huynh says she uses it for all her subjects, even Math. “When I don’t understand things, ChatGPT explains them,” she adds. It’s a good alternative for when your teachers or peers aren’t around to help you figure out schoolwork.”
Ms. Monik Flores, an English teacher at Northside, thinks that her students “realistically use ChatGPT 2 to 3 times a week for academic purposes.” She said, “I know they use it to synthesize information and do research.” Still, her English classes don’t allow her students to use it, as she believes that “the efficiency that ChatGPT provides is less important than preserving students’ actual writing voices.”
Ms. Amy Wagner teaches AP Computer Science Principles and Exploring Computer Science at Northside. Her students “use ChatGPT or other generative AI at least once a week, if not on every assignment, mostly for debugging programs when writing their own code.” She believes that, at least for the Computer Science department, ChatGPT in the classroom is “mostly a positive” and that “learning to use generative AI is an essential skill in itself for students, especially for the software engineering industry.”
The tool is also being used positively in other Northside departments, including for the Hoofbeat! Journalism student Sophie Zinder explains: “I’ve used ChatGPT in Journalism class. We were doing teacher profiles, and we used a Google form to get all the teachers to answer the same general questions, and then we inputted their answers into ChatGPT and told it to combine our answers together into a story. We were [then] careful to edit and ensure all the information was accurate.”
Social Science teacher Ms. Irving said, “If you’ve already completed a task, it could be helpful to use generative AI as a proofreading or editing device. There is also a creative and fun element to it—like figuring out what a computer thinks a movie poster for the Elizabethan Settlement would look like!”
However, students and teachers alike expressed caveats about the new technology. Ms. Monik Flores prefers that her students not use it for her classes. She said, “I think what’s hard about it is that, while students mention that they just use it to draw inspiration, in English class, that’s half the battle. We’re living in a society where we want things really quickly, and I don’t want my students to lose their ability to come up with things and sit and wrestle with ideas.”
Junior Kaleb Diaz, who uses ChatGPT for “English and Biology class to help with understanding the material, around twice a week,” considers it “a positive in the classroom.” Furthermore, he said, “Although it can clarify things and help with inspiration, people definitely abuse it.”
Amberly expresses concerns, too: “Some people use it to cheat, especially with writing stuff. And a lot of times, it’s inaccurate. Plus, you might not develop the skills or motivation you need to succeed.”
As Ms. Irving puts it, “A lot of what is taught in high school is more about the lifelong skills and abilities to think, synthesize information, and support an argument critically, so if students aren’t getting those skills because they think it’s more important to just spit out content using generative AI, that worries me.”
Amidst all the concerns and excitement surrounding generative AI at school, teachers and departments have different policies for students to follow.
In her computer science classes, Ms. Wagner urges students to “never use generative AI to write a whole program for themselves and pass it off as their own without crediting the AI because that would be detrimental to their learning.”
Ms. Irving’s classroom policy bans the usage of generative AI and ChatGPT on any essays or assessments and “requires students to use information specific from activities we’ve learned in class, so even if they do use ChatGPT, they are synthesizing information we’ve already learned in class.”
Ms. Flores does not support the usage of ChatGPT for any writing purposes or assignments in her classroom.
Northside has many teachers, students, and administrators with diverse ideas and perspectives. These voices contribute to our school-wide conversations about the new and rapidly changing academic environment. Policies related to ChatGPT can vary drastically depending on the individual, the subject, or the department.
Under some circumstances, generative AI is viewed as positive, or even integral, to students’ learning. In other situations, it can be detrimental.
But teachers and students have some advice for fellow Northsiders navigating this complicated new reality.
Ms. Wagner encourages students to “be upfront about your use of AI and give credit where credit is due.” She also warns them against committing plagiarism.
Ms Irving has something for students to remember: “Just understand why teachers teach in the first place. It’s not to fill your brain with facts; it’s to develop skills for later use. If you shortcut that process, make sure to think about how that serves you in the long run.”
Amberly states, “It’s a great study resource, and you should use it to check your work. But make sure to do the actual work yourself.”
Ms Flores sums it up nicely: “At the end of the day, we care about your voice more than a robot’s. It’s okay if you use this as a tool, but don’t just immediately accept its output as fact. Always trust yourself and your instincts above all else.”
