){kind=logo}
){kind=icon}
){kind=logo}
){kind=icon}
In previous articles, we discussed the need for universities to rethink their codes of ethics in the face of the technological progress represented by images generated with artificial intelligence and ChatGPT. Students should assume the primary role of working with teachers and technology experts to balance the tool’s potential and regulation.
Apart from students, higher education institutions benefit from this resource to ensure an educational future. What position should they take? They must also find common ground between restriction and flexibility. Tecnologico de Monterrey recently spoke out on the issue.
An official university statement signed by the Rector of Professional and Postgraduate Programs, Juan Pablo Murra, and the Vice President of Integrity and Compliance, Paulina Campos, said, “As an educational institution, we see opportunities to boost the teaching-learning processes with these new artificial intelligence tools. We are working to explore the best ways to develop them, as is the case of the Institute for the Future of Education (IFE).”
The document also mentions that the Tec21 Educational Model rules and teacher feedback are the basis for developing a prudent approach to learning and assessing the operational implications of artificial intelligence in an academic context.
The teachers’ guide
To better understand the implications of artificial intelligence and how to integrate it into the didactic dynamics, we need the guidance of the teachers. Professor Reyna Martínez, who accompanied us in our webinar on Chatbots in Education, offers a clear perspective to understand the tool, how it works, why we should not fear it, and how its correct use can be instrumental for the future of education.
The teacher explained her impressions on the subject for the IFE Observatory that the daily use of resources such as the ChatGPT is inevitable. The way this technology evolved, with the expectation of accessibility to everyone to improve and facilitate people’s lives, made it a prevalent resource for students. She commented, “As a teacher, I understand the worry and concern that this chatbot has unleashed in the educational community. Its natural language management is fluid and structured, and it will improve with time.”
Professor Martínez elaborated on the benefits of ChatGPT but clarified that it is not perfect. It digests publications on the internet through 2021, makes mistakes, or reports on the requested topics superficially. The professor argued that a restrictive agenda against artificial intelligence among universities, either because of this limitation or because of the possibility that it can be used for acts of academic dishonesty, could be counterproductive against students and good teaching practices.
“Thinking about prohibiting its use will not only deprive our students of knowing their potential but also inhibit the development of skills that allow them to interact with this type of technology that will soon be necessary to develop in the school, personal, and work environments.”
To approach AI
Professor Reyna presents a critical argument about the need for educational institutions to adopt artificial intelligence and learn how to use these technologies. If the labor market hires professionally competent graduates, then the ethical duty of trainers is not to shield students from artificial intelligence but to explore its positive and ethical use, to transmit these teachings to their learners.
Among Professor Martínez’ recommendations is a call for teachers to know and manage ChatGPT, become familiar with what it can do, and be the first to understand its capabilities to monitor students and leverage AI’s expertise in performing repetitive tasks and exercises.
Another vital point to consider is raising awareness about the consequences and impact on learning that dishonest exercises with this type of technology can cause. Including heads of household in this conversation will lead to clear and lasting notions that influence the integration of ChatGPT into educational practice.
Defining objectives and competencies to develop will facilitate a better understanding of what AI can do in a classroom. Some suggestions that teacher Martinez mentioned included classroom activities, oral assessments, mind maps, video making, collaborative work, and creative assistance for students.
The dialogue about creating ethical notions must include the issue of privacy. Martínez elaborated on an edge that few people see due to the enormous interest in protecting academic honesty. Every time we use ChatGPT, we contribute to its education. This creates a dilemma in itself. Additionally, software development companies have access to the conversations generated by AI. This aspect should attract our attention more, especially regarding underage students.
What do you think about AI capabilities? How is it changing teaching practices? Do you think it is worth keeping an open mind to discover its ideal use? Or do you think it would be a crutch for students and an obstacle to academic honesty? Let us know in the comments.
Translation by Daniel Wetta
){kind=icon}
){kind=icon}
This article from Observatory of the Institute for the Future of Education may be shared under the terms of the license CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 
)