# data[].attributes.headline
Draft sensitive emails (you can ask for multiple options and pick your favorite)

# data[].attributes.subject
Draft sensitive emails (you can ask for multiple options and pick your favorite)

# data[].attributes.headline
Ask it to explain something in a way that 🤬 graders would understand

# data[].attributes.subject
Ask it to explain something in a way that 🤬 graders would understand

# data[].attributes.headline
Noam Chomsky on the false promise of ChatGPT

# data[].attributes.subject
Noam Chomsky on the false promise of ChatGPT

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Opinion | Noam Chomsky: The False Promise of ChatGPT

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The most prominent strain of A.I. encodes a flawed conception of language and knowledge.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
SOPA Images / Contributor/Getty Images

Become smarter in just 5 minutes

Get the daily email that makes reading the news actually enjoyable. Stay informed and entertained, for free.

After weeks of asking ChatGPT questions like "What would a discussion of quantum physics between Kim Kardashian and SpongeBob sound like?", some users now have a more consequential query for the AI: Would you vote Democrat?

The OpenAI chatbot's responses on topics ranging from the 2020 presidential election to specific politicians' characters have some suspicious that it might not be entirely nonpartisan and may even exhibit left-leaning bias. That's got people worried about the societal implications of a prejudiced algorithm writing news stories, policy proposals, and computer code. So, let's dive into where the AI fits into our highly polarized political landscape.

Signs of a biased bot

There's a reason some conservatives are calling ChatGPT "woke." Several users have alleged ChatGPT returned political responses to their queries.

A researcher fed it prompts from questionnaires designed to place respondents into political camps. According to that researcher, ChatGPT is a liberal: a supporter of legalized marijuana and military spending cuts, and a vehement opponent of abortion bans. (In a more recent replication of the experiment, the chatbot appeared to have drifted to the center of the political spectrum.)

A viral tweet pointed out that ChatGPT refused to write a sycophantic poem about Donald Trump on the grounds that it was designed to avoid producing "content that is partisan, biased, or political in nature," but obliged when the same request was made for the current POTUS.

ChatGPT judged it morally unacceptable to use a racial slur even in a hypothetical scenario in which doing so was the only way to avert a nuclear disaster.

But...others contend that ChatGPT's supposed wokeness is only superficial. They point out that the chatbot can easily be tricked into churning out racist and sexist statements. Those concerned about AI-enabled bigotry claim that it's necessary for the tool to block certain outputs so it errs on the side of not harming marginalized groups.

So, what shapes ChatGPT's moral compass?

While ChatGPT itself claims it's apolitical because it's not human, OpenAI CEO Sam Altman acknowledges that it has "shortcomings around bias."

Experts say this probably originates from the datasets that are used to train the bot's algorithm: ChatGPT likely earned some of its chops by hoovering up content from various news outlets, as well as Reddit and Twitter-websites hardly known as cradles of objectivity, or toxicity-free zones.

Conservative commentators see something more intentional. They claim that ChatGPT's apparent left-of-center proclivities reflect the values of the folks that built and manually trained the tool, as tech employees overwhelmingly support Democrats and tend to identify as liberals.

Big picture: Some consider these concerns overblown, since ChatGPT is merely a word generator and is unlikely to be called on to solve moral dilemmas with millions of lives at stake. But the AI's alleged biases present a challenge for the companies trying to harness its text-generating prowess. The last thing these organizations want is for an automation tool to land them on the battlefield of the Great Culture Wars. -SK

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Become smarter in just 5 minutes Get the daily email that makes reading the news actually enjoyable. Stay informed and entertained, for free. After weeks of asking ChatGPT questions like "What would a discussion of quantum physics between Kim Kardashian and SpongeBob sound like?", some users now have a more consequential query for the AI: Would you vote Democrat?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Teach news literacy this week
ChatGPT misuse | Showing violent images | Debunking ozone myths

Coming up:

Los Angeles Times reporter Libor Jany covers the L.A. Police Department. NLP's Hannah Covington interviews him for News Goggles in our upcoming Feb. 6 newsletter.

Top picks

ChatGPT, a chatbot utilizing AI to generate text, launched in November 2022. The controversial tool raises a variety of concerns, from cheating in school assignments to producing misinformation. (Illustration credit: Shutterstock)

Love RumorGuard? Receive timely updates by signing up for RG alerts here.

Lisa Marie Presley didn't post about COVID-19 vaccine before her death

NO: There is no evidence that Lisa Marie Presley's death was related to the COVID-19 vaccine. NO: Presley did not write a post about getting the COVID-19 vaccine shortly before her death. YES: The "Lisa Marie" who wrote the post is a fashion stylist and influencer from Venezuela. YES: Anti-vaxxers have repeatedly exploited celebrity deaths by baselessly claiming they were caused by the COVID-19 vaccine.

NewsLit takeaway: The appetite for information related to a trending news story is often exploited by bad actors seeking to push disinformation. In the wake of Presley's death on Jan. 12, vaccine deniers seized on a screenshot of a social media post published by an account from "Lisa Marie." The post was authentic; it was shared on Facebook by Lisa Marie Borjas, a beauty blogger and influencer whose name on Facebook is simply, "Lisa Marie." Social media posts that circulate online as a screenshot are sometimes misleading. Because they contain no direct links, they can easily spread misinformation that isn't simple to verify. Basic verification skills - such as a quick search for a portion of the text of the post - would have found fact checks proving the original author was a fashion stylist in Venezuela.

Vibranium? No, electrically charged rocks weren't discovered in Congo

NO: This video does not show a newly discovered type of electrically charged rock. YES: Some rocks can serve as conduits for electricity. NO: Experts and geologists told news agencies that these rocks are not " generating some kind of voltage" on their own. NO: This rumored discovery has not been verified by any credible scientific body or other standards-based source.

NewsLit takeaway: Sometimes the most important part of a video is happening just out of frame. When a series of videos went viral - videos that supposedly show rocks acting as batteries to power small electrical devices, such as lightbulbs - various experts weighed in to note that this footage did not comport with what was known about geology. Some rocks can conduct electricity, but they cannot generate energy. So how does the stunt in this video work? There is likely a battery hiding out of frame.

Remember, the simplest explanation is usually the correct one. In this case, we have one assertion - a previously unknown material was discovered that acts unlike any other geological formation and can produce an infinite amount of energy - to weigh against the likelihood that someone made a deceptive video and shared it online. What seems more plausible? Also note that major scientific discoveries are unlikely to be announced first on social media.

You can find this week's rumor examples to use with students in these slides.

ICYMI: In case you missed it, the most-clicked link in The Sift last week was the Edelman Trust Barometer, an online survey that sampled respondents in 28 countries about trust in institutions, including media. The survey found that the U.S. is one of six "severely polarized" countries.

Love The Sift? Please take a moment to forward it to your colleagues. They can also subscribe here.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Sift: ChatGPT misuse | Showing violent images | Debunking ozone myths

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Teach news literacy this week ChatGPT misuse | Showing violent images | Debunking ozone myths Coming up: Los Angeles Times reporter Libor Jany covers the L.A. Police Department. NLP's Hannah Covington interviews him for News Goggles in our upcoming Feb. 6 newsletter. Top picks ChatGPT, a chatbot utilizing AI to generate text, launched in November 2022.

# data[].attributes.headline
Identify grade level books based on a theme, character representation, etc.

# data[].attributes.subject
Identify grade level books based on a theme, character representation, etc.

# data[].attributes.headline
Develop Lesson and Unit Plans (you can ask for more than one and choose your favorite!)

# data[].attributes.subject
Develop Lesson and Unit Plans (you can ask for more than one and choose your favorite!)

# data[].attributes.headline
Generate texts and articles for guided reading

# data[].attributes.subject
Generate texts and articles for guided reading

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Presented by Laura Ogando, Program Manager, Digital Literacy & Inclusion, New York City Department of Education (NY); and Tammi Sisk, Education Technology Specialist, Fairfax County Public Schools (VA)
Moderated by Tali Horowitz, East Coast Education Director, Common Sense Education

Sponsored by Common Sense Education
Watch the Recording Learn more about viewing the live presentation and the recording, earning your CE certificate, and using our new accessibility features.
Watch Laura Ogando from the New York City Department of Education and Tammi Sisk from Fairfax County Public Schools for a lively discussion on the implications of artificial intelligence in the learning experience. They share their districts' approaches as well as how to address some of the primary concerns-and possibilities-of ChatGPT. Together, they consider the viewpoints of the key stakeholders through the lens of a digital dilemma and thinking routine.

This recorded edWebinar is of interest to K-12 teachers, librarians, school and district leaders, and education technology leaders.
About the Presenters
Laura Ogando began her more than 13-year career in the New York City Department of Education (NYCDOE) as an elementary school special educator. It was in her role as a special educator that Laura became an advocate for using technology to bring equity and access to all learners. After her time in the classroom, she worked in her school's media center as a digital literacy specialist, where she designed and developed her own curriculum that brought together digital literacy, computer science, and project-based learning. Currently, Laura is the Deputy Technology Director, Digital Accessibility and Citizenship at the Manhattan Division of Instructional & Information Technology (DIIT). She has been training teachers, in the DOE and around the country, in accessibility, Google tools for education, and digital literacy and citizenship. Laura holds various edtech certifications-Google Level 1 and 2 Educator, Google Innovator, BrainPOP Educator, Common Sense Media Ambassador, and Apple Teacher. She has presented at local conferences within the NYCDOE, at ISTE, and with various international organizations. Laura is a proven leader who has given workshops at Lehman College and has delivered numerous professional development opportunities at various school districts.
About the Moderator
As an educator, Tammi Sisk passionately invests her time and energy in creating and facilitating experiences that allow people to use technology for social good and with empathy, ethics, and a sense of individual and civic responsibility. She is an instructional technology specialist at the district level for Fairfax County Public Schools with an M.Ed. in instructional technology. Educating teachers, students, and parents about digital citizenship is an area of passion and focus. Tammi is a member of ISTE and VSTE. Outside of her workday, you'll find her doing yoga, skiing, gardening, hiking with her English Bulldog, and traveling.
Learn more about viewing the live presentation and the recording, earning your CE certificate, and using our new accessibility features.
Tali Horowitz is the East Coast Education Director at Common Sense, where she works with educators and families to empower kids to meaningfully harness the power of media and technology for learning and life. She partners with state-level organizations, school districts, and community organizations to help integrate Common Sense Education resources. She provides educational leadership through consultation with school districts, professional development (both in-person and virtual), and conference presentations. Tali has been an educator for 20 years. Her passions include helping educators and families effectively navigate the digital world and building cultural competency. She has worked in a variety of educational settings, including as an elementary school teacher in the New York City Department of Education and the San Francisco Unified School District. In 2013, she received a Fulbright Fellowship to research culturally responsive pedagogy in New Zealand. In her free time, she loves face-to-face interactions with friends and family.

Join the Digital Learning & Leadership community to network with educators, participate in online discussions, receive invitations to upcoming edWebinars, and view recordings of previous programs to earn CE certificates.

Common Sense Education develops high-quality digital citizenship programs and digital teaching resources, providing educators and students with the digital learning tools they need to harness the power of technology for life.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Join presenters for a lively discussion on the implications of artificial intelligence in the learning experience.

# data[].attributes.headline
ChatGPT NOT a Hit on College Campuses (yet)

# data[].attributes.subject
ChatGPT NOT a Hit on College Campuses (yet)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Dianna "Mick" McDougall, Sources: Getty Images, OpenAI

Become smarter in just 5 minutes

Get the daily email that makes reading the news actually enjoyable. Stay informed and entertained, for free.

Despite a cyclone of headlines and hype, ChatGPT remains almost as unpopular on campus as the overachiever who asks a question when the professor is about to end class.

In a survey of 520 US college students, a Morning Brew/Generation Lab poll found that 40% of them have never heard of the chatbot from OpenAI.

Of those who have heard of ChatGPT, 52% have never used it.

And the students who said they do fire up ChatGPT...don't use it all that much, as 55% of respondents who said they've used ChatGPT do so "almost never."

Of course, ChatGPT was released just a few months ago-so in a sense it is also quite remarkable that 60% of college students have heard of it. Still, it hasn't made major inroads on college campuses yet, even while many instructors warn the new tech could create havoc in the classroom.

So, why aren't college students using ChatGPT? Mostly because it doesn't meet their needs.

56% of respondents who haven't used ChatGPT said the primary reason why is that they've not had a use for it.

29% said they weren't interested, while 5% said the chatbot makes too many errors.

Uses for ChatGPT

Among the students who do use ChatGPT...what are they using it for?

For giggles: 71% of students who've used ChatGPT said they use it in part for entertainment or just for fun.

As Google: 32% of students who've used ChatGPT said they use it in part for quick answers to simple questions, and 31% to understand complex topics.

For...cheating? 17% of students who've heard of ChatGPT said they have direct knowledge of friends using ChatGPT to cheat.

And while overall ChatGPT adoption is low on college campuses, it has gained power users. 25% of the students who've used ChatGPT have it bookmarked on their web browser.

The big, thorny questions

The arrival of ChatGPT and other AI chatbots could lead to significant economic disruption, creating new jobs that didn't exist before and automating (aka eliminating) others.

Are college students rethinking their future career paths in light of these new technologies? In our poll, the majority said no, but it's still notable that 20% of students who've heard of ChatGPT said the chatbot has influenced their career thinking.

And to close out, a fun one: Is ChatGPT good or evil?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
ChatGPT not a hit on college campuses...yet

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Become smarter in just 5 minutes Get the daily email that makes reading the news actually enjoyable. Stay informed and entertained, for free. Despite a cyclone of headlines and hype, ChatGPT remains almost as unpopular on campus as the overachiever who asks a question when the professor is about to end class.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
There's been a lot of ink spilled over how ChatGPT will make it easier for students to cheat. But a new survey shows that many teachers have a positive view of the artificial intelligence technology and they're even using it more often than their students are.

Fifty-one percent of teachers say they have used ChatGPT, with 40 percent of teachers saying they use it weekly and 10 percent reporting they use it almost every day, according to a nationally representative survey of more than 1,000 K-12 teachers and 1,000 students by the polling and research firm Impact Research for the Walton Family Foundation.

By comparison, only a third of students ages 12-17 reported using ChatGPT for school, and just 22 percent said they use it on a weekly basis or more.

When asked if "ChatGPT will likely have legitimate educational uses we cannot ignore," 59 percent of teachers agreed, while a quarter said they believe "ChatGPT will likely only be useful for students to cheat."

Teachers reported in the survey that they are using the AI program for lesson planning, generating creative ideas for their classes, and putting together background knowledge for their lessons.

For example, a teacher in Utah told Education Week that he used ChatGPT to generate multiple examples of a single argument using different tones, estimating the chatbot saved him more than an hour's worth of work. Teachers have also used the program to give students feedback on assignments, build rubrics, compose emails to parents, and write letters of recommendation.

ChatGPT's ability to perform all these functions got mixed reviews from teachers, when Education Week asked a group of them to evaluate the technology. These teachers were most optimistic about the program's capabilities to save them time in responding to emails and creating rubrics, but less impressed by the lesson plan ChatGPT generated or its ability to grade an essay.

Many teachers more likely to permit, than prohibit, students' use of ChatGPT

Of the teachers using ChatGPT, the Impact Research/Walton Foundation survey found that 88 percent gave the AI program a good review, saying it has had a positive impact on instruction. Seventy-nine percent of students said the same thing.

Teachers report they have been much more likely to allow students to use ChatGPT than they have been to catch students using it without permission. Thirty-eight percent of teachers say they have given their students the green light to use the program, compared to 10 percent who say they have caught their students using ChatGPT without their permission.

Fifteen percent of students said they have used ChatGPT without their teachers' consent.

Around three-quarters of teachers say that ChatGPT can help their students learn more and help them grow as teachers. Among students, 68 percent believe the program can help them become better students and 75 percent think it helps them learn faster.

But for those teachers concerned about students using ChatGPT to cheat on writing assignments, there are ways to stay one step ahead of them and AI, such as asking students to write about things ChatGPT won't know about, such as themselves or an issue specific to their local community. Teachers can also require students to complete their assignments in class with pencil and paper.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What Do Teachers Think of ChatGPT? You Might Be Surprised

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
There's been a lot of ink spilled over how ChatGPT will make it easier for students to cheat. But a new survey shows that many teachers have a positive view of the artificial intelligence technology and they're even using it more often than their students are.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
AI, Chatbots & ChatGPT for Teachers

This free course is intended for teachers who want to know more about ChatGPT, use it in their practice, looking for inspiration/examples of its power or those trying to improve their use of this AI chatbot.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Learn ChatGPT, AI, chatbots for use by teachers in education

# data[].attributes.headline
How to Use ChatGPT as an Example Machine

# data[].attributes.subject
How to Use ChatGPT as an Example Machine

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Sponsored by Listenwise and Wipebook

This post was co-written by Sarah Levine.

Editor's Note: This post takes a pragmatic approach to ChatGPT while acknowledging some of the problems that have already arisen with the tool. Other ethical issues with the tool's development have been brought to light in recent weeks that are not mentioned here. It is our belief that teachers are most effective when they are informed and empowered, so we urge you to stay mindful of these complexities when making decisions for your own practice.

You have probably already heard about or tinkered with ChatGPT (the "GPT" stands for "generative pre-trained transformer"). ChatGPT is a chatbot (or "bot") powered by artificial intelligence (AI). You can have a conversation with it, prompt it to write essays, create recipes, make medical diagnoses, mimic famous authors, and code software. Its outputs are impressively human-like. In just five days, it gained one million users, a milestone that took Facebook ten months to achieve.

ChatGPT comes with risks: Students can now copy and paste a school writing assignment into the bot's dialogue window, and the bot will spit out an essay in a couple of minutes. Also, because ChatGPT gets most of its content and genre knowledge from the web, it can generate sexist, racist, or blatantly false information, all in an authoritative tone. For example:

The prompt entered for ChatGPT:
"Can you put seven blue balls and two red balls into a tube that holds eight balls?"

Text response generated by ChatGPT:
"Yes, it is possible to put seven blue balls and two red balls into a tube that holds eight balls. The total number of balls is nine which is less than or equal to the capacity of the tube."

As literacy researchers and former high school teachers, we recognize these risks. BUT: we don't think we can avoid ChatGPT and its family of AI tools. It is not just a future vision of learning; it is already here. And we are only scratching the surface of what AI will do in the next five to ten years. So this post is about one particular way that teachers can use ChatGPT to support kids' learning: Using ChatGPT as an example machine.

ChatGPT's ability to quickly produce a lot of examples of different kinds of texts makes it uniquely suited to learning strategies like concept attainment, inductive learning, or one that we'll focus on here called contrasting cases.

Why Multiple Examples Are So Important in Learning

The basic idea behind strategies like contrasting cases or concept attainment is that one example is not enough to help people learn about a thing (like an idea or a process). People need to compare multiple, contrasting examples.

Not coincidentally, ChatGPT is built on a similar type of machine learning. For example, for a computer to recognize an image of a dog, it has to process thousands of images of dogs - but also needs to process images of "not dogs," like cats, foxes, and wolves - to accurately construct a general definition and model of dog. In other words, to know what a dog is, you also need to know what it is not.

Across disciplines, teachers use multiple contrasting examples to help students develop mental models of processes and concepts. Social studies teachers provide examples of different types of governments, English teachers provide examples of different literary interpretations, and science teachers give examples to illustrate different types of energy. Students can sequence, rank, or categorize these examples in ways that help them understand underlying concepts.

But developing these examples can take a lot of time. ChatGPT can generate any number of contrasting examples in a few minutes. Then teachers can revise and perfect those examples, and have more time to dedicate to other creative lessons.

How to Get Good Examples from ChatGPT

To use ChatGPT as an example machine, teachers first need to know how to prompt it effectively. ChatGPT will do exactly what it is prompted to do and nothing more, so it's important to give it precise instructions. Here are steps to a general approach we have been using to prompt the bot:

1. Establish criteria: Think about the elements that define a strong example of the thing you want kids to learn about (You can draw from your rubrics or final assignments to do this).

2. Prompt: Prompt ChatGPT to create an example of whatever concept, process, or phenomena you are trying to teach.

3. Review and adapt: Review the bot's output and adapt it as you see fit.

4. Prompt for contrasting cases: Prompt it to create several non-examples, incorrect examples, or ambiguous examples. These are your contrasting cases.

5. Review and adapt: Review the outputs again and adapt them as you see fit.

Here's an example. With this one, our goal was to help students learn the underlying principles of kinetic and potential energy. We used ChatGPT to generate a range of different examples of kinetic and potential energy. Kids could sort these examples into categories and then explain their choices. In the screenshots below, the text next to the yellow icon is our prompt, and the text next to the green icon is ChatGPT's response. Following the process we introduced earlier:

Step 1 - Establish criteria: We wanted students to know that potential energy is energy that is stored, and kinetic energy is energy in motion.

Step 2 - Prompt: We asked ChatGPT to generate a list of five real-life examples of kinetic energy. (Click images for a larger view.)

Step 3 - Review and adapt: These examples looked pretty good. The fifth one - waterfall cascading down a cliff - might be a good example of both kinetic and potential energy. We could keep this one if we think our kids are ready for some ambiguity in the sorting exercise.

Step 4 - Prompt for contrasting cases: Next, we asked ChatGPT to generate examples of potential energy. These serve as our contrasting cases. (When prompting ChatGPT, you can basically talk to it as you would a person. For the most part, it remembers your previous prompts.)

Step 5 - Review and adapt: These examples also looked pretty good. We decided that we want to add one more ambiguous example that will increase the complexity of the contrasting cases. So we prompted ChatGPT:

We revised that example to simply read: "A car moving down a hill." That way, when we included it in our sorting exercise, students would have to do the work of defining the kinds of energy represented in the example.

Reviewing the outputs again, we noticed that three examples were very similar: a car moving down the highway (kinetic), a roller coaster at the top of the hill (potential), and a car moving down a hill (both). The similarities made these three examples a great illustration of contrasting cases, because students would need to come up with a nuanced rationale for why they represent different types of energy.

We could now mix up these examples on a Padlet or Google Slide, or we can print each one out on a separate piece of paper. Then students can debate with one another about each example, categorize them, and explain their choices. In their explanations, they would be constructing criteria that characterize each type of energy.

Using the example machine for different learning goals

Here are some ways to use ChatGPT to generate contrasting cases to help students understand underlying conceptual principles and build mental models. We have organized our examples based on three common learning goals: learning about processes, concepts, and arguments.

Examples to Explore Processes

Students learn about processes in many subjects. For example, they learn the steps for balancing chemical equations, solving mathematical inequalities, describing mitosis, or explaining how a bill becomes a law in the U.S. One way to help students learn the underlying logic of different processes is to generate contrasting cases of correct and incorrect sequences.

In the example below, we ask ChatGPT to provide a few contrasting cases to teach young students about the life cycle of a seed.

Step 1 - Establish criteria: First, we considered the steps we wanted students to understand.

Step 2 - Prompt: We prompted the bot to generate an accurate representation of that cycle. We also prompted the bot to write at the level of a five year-old, so we could ensure the explanation was accessible.

Step 3 - Review and adapt: We checked the bot's output to make sure it was accurate. We liked the initial result, so we kept it without revision.

Step 4 - Prompt for contrasting cases: In process learning, students need to know both what happens, and in what order. A logical activity is for students to have to move the steps from incorrect to correct order. Normally, we would re-organize the steps manually, but ChatGPT can do it faster.

We decided we also wanted a second contrasting case, so we asked ChatGPT to describe the seed's life cycle using the correct order, but leaving out steps. Now students would have to figure out what steps were missing: sprout growth and seed production. Again, this was something we would typically do ourselves, but giving the task to ChatGPT saved us some time.

Step 5 - Review and adapt: We liked these examples and decided to keep them without revision.

Just as with the activity about potential and kinetic energy, we could now present these contrasting cases to students either digitally or on paper, ask them to identify the most accurate representations, and then explain why. In doing so, students will start to develop "rules" about both the events in a seed's life and their order.

Using slight prompt modifications, teachers can change the order, accuracy, and completeness of the contrasting cases to deepen students' thinking about complex processes.

Adaptations for other subject areas:

Social studies: sequence historical events

Math: sequence steps in an approach to solving a proof

English: sequence key plot points in a novel

Examples to Explore Concepts

Teachers can also use ChatGPT to teach students to articulate principles that underlie complex concepts like authorial style, statistical variance, or separation of powers.

One of ChatGPT's coolest tricks is its ability to adopt the style of different writers or historical figures. It can also write in the style of different genres, like a cover letter, advertisement, or movie trailer. Creating contrasting cases with combinations of these outputs can make for a powerful teaching tool. In the example below, we wanted students to understand how different literary elements can contribute to authorial style, and to consider how those elements might affect their emotional responses to texts. We asked ChatGPT to produce texts in the style of different authors - all authors that were familiar to our students.

Using these contrasting cases, we could then ask students to match the review with the author, point to and name specific features of the writing that helped them identify the authors' styles, and then talk about the effects created by those different styles.

Step 1 - Establish criteria: We wanted students to understand that an author's style includes a combination of word choice, sentence structure, and attitude toward a topic. We wanted the examples to have different emotional effects.

Step 2 - Prompt: It would be easier for students to focus on style if the content of the text was similar. So we asked the bot to write about something students would be familiar with. We decided on a review of McDonald's in the style of three authors.

Step 3 - Review and adapt: In this review, ChatGPT used phrases like "dreary and tempestuous" and "wandering," which work well to represent Poe's language. The bot also did a good job creating a mood of gloom and foreboding. But we realized we wanted to emphasize Poe's punctuation (lots of exclamation points, for example). So we adapted our prompt.

Well, the bot went a little overboard with the exclamation points, so we might revise one more time.

Step 4 - Prompt for contrasting cases: Next, we wanted to generate our contrasting cases, so we asked ChatGPT to rewrite the reviews in the style of other authors that our students have read. We started with Sandra Cisneros.

Step 5 - Review and adapt: We didn't think Cisneros' characters would moralize about McDonald's, so we asked the bot to revise. We also realized that a lot of Cisneros' work is written in present tense. Making the change to present tense would give our students another element of style to consider and analyze. We prompted the bot again.

We might go for another round of revision, but we think this one is beginning to capture the style of Cisneros' narrators.

We tried for another example, this time turning to Zora Neale Hurston and Their Eyes Were Watching God for our model.

We thought some of the phrasing was a little obvious, and when we compared this example with some of Hurston's prose, we noticed that Hurston sometimes includes short, simple sentences in between longer ones. We adapted our prompt.

Now, here is another example where we prompted ChatGPT to provide some contrasting cases. This time, we used the bot in the context of a social studies unit on forms of government. In the example, ChatGPT's first response was pretty good. In this example, we will show you one way that we had to revise our initial prompts to generate more useful responses.

Step 1: Establish criteria: We wanted students to know that in a representative democracy, citizens vote in free and open elections to choose government leaders. In representative democracies, the rule of law applies equally to all citizens.

Step 2: Prompt:

Step 3: Review and adapt: In our first attempt, ChatGPT wrote a pretty accurate description. However, since we ultimately wanted students themselves to identify the types of government described in each example, we needed ChatGPT to remove the term "representative democracy." We also wanted it to add the criteria that rule of law applies to all citizens. So we had to revise our prompt.

Step 4: Prompt for contrasting cases: Next, we needed ChatGPT to generate contrasting cases. In other words, we wanted it to describe other types of governments besides representative democracy, including monarchy and communism. Importantly, because we wanted students to understand representative democracy, we also wanted a contrasting case that showed a different type of democracy. So, we prompted ChatGPT to include a description of direct democracy. Having learned our lesson in our last prompting attempt, we also prompted the bot to leave out the names of the governments themselves.

Step 5: Review and adapt: We liked these examples, but after reading them through a few times, we decided that they might be boring for kids. We decided to revise them so that each offered a specific scenario that students could connect with different forms of government.

We could print these examples on cards, give them to students, and ask them to identify the kinds of governments described in these examples. We could also go a step further and ask students to rank the descriptions based on the degree of power given to people in each example. This would require students not only to identify the characteristics of representative democracies but also understand its relationship to other forms of government. There are many variations to these types of sorting activities, and using contrasting cases will help students build rich mental models. ChatGPT magnifies our ability to use contrasting cases by creating useful examples more quickly than we could by ourselves.
Adaptations for other subject areas:

Science: "Write a description of the gaseous planets but do not use the term "gaseous." Now do the same for the ice giants and terrestrial planets."

Math: "Make up a math problem about rate, time, and distance, and then, using a character named Sam, describe three different ways that Sam tried to solve the problem. Have two solutions be correct, and one solution be incorrect."

Examples to Explore Arguments

One of the most important skills taught students learn in all subject areas is the ability to evaluate and construct arguments. In English class, students might write essays about whether Troy, from August Wilson's Fences, is a sympathetic character; in social studies, they might consider multiple causes and effects of World War I; in biology, they might make their case for whether a virus is a living organism. We can use ChatGPT to generate examples of arguments with contrasting structures or types of evidence, then students can evaluate each argument's effectiveness. For such a lesson design, we would use the five steps we described earlier:

1. Establish criteria for strong argument

2. Prompt

3. Review and adapt

4. Prompt for contrasting cases, including weaker or stronger evidence, or different structures

5. Review and adapt again

We could also use the bot to address a long-standing problem when it comes to teaching students to build arguments: Sometimes we ask students to write an argument about a text, but we do not give students anyone to argue with. In this case, ChatGPT can provide a contrasting case for a student to push back against.

For example, imagine that a high school class has just finished reading Fences. The teacher would like kids to consider the role of the fence as a potential symbol in Wilson's play. Instead of asking students to write an argument about the role of fences in the play, the teacher could offer students a ChatGPT-generated argument that students could respond to.

This argument in itself becomes a contrasting case for students to reflect on and respond to. They can agree with some of the interpretation, build on some parts of it, and refute other parts. In this way, their argument becomes more authentic. They might even direct their response to the bot.

We might also offer students an opposing argument about Fences:

With these two arguments in hand, we could ask students to debate the merits of each, search the text for supporting evidence, and write about perspectives beyond just these two. Doing so would help students consider multiple interpretations of complex texts and develop and refine their own arguments.

Adaptations for other subject areas:

Science: Generate summaries of competing scientific theories

Social Studies: Generate different arguments explaining cause and effects of historical events

Before ChatGPT, teachers might spend hours searching for or writing suitable examples of arguments like these. Now, we are learning how to prompt ChatGPT to generate these arguments to suit our teaching purposes.

What's Next?

There's so much more this example machine can do to help us save time and employ our creativity so that we can better serve our students. Here are a few additional prompts that create other kinds of examples:

Rewrite this paragraph at a 6th grade reading level

Use more complex vocabulary

Translate this sentence into Spanish, and then Vietnamese

With all of its possibilities in mind, a reminder: There are lots of ways that ChatGPT can create problems for teachers. The technology is still young, and it does not know when it is wrong. For instance, when we first asked ChatGPT to generate interpretations of Fences, it made up lines from the play. When we asked it to talk about the short story "Linoleum Roses," by Sandra Cisneros, it added characters that do not exist in that story, and offered unsupportable interpretations of the text. Part of our job now is to help students understand both what the tool can do and what it can't.

Want some ideas for what to DO with these examples once you have them? Three instructional strategies that would work beautifully with multiple examples like these are contrasting cases, concept attainment, and inductive learning.

Come back for more.
Join our mailing list and get weekly tips, tools, and inspiration that will make your teaching more effective and fun. You'll get access to our members-only library of free downloads, including 20 Ways to Cut Your Grading Time in Half, the e-booklet that has helped thousands of teachers save time on grading. Over 50,000 teachers have already joined-come on in.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How to Use ChatGPT as an Example Machine

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
To learn any concept well, students need to experience multiple examples of that concept, and ChatGPT can help you generate those examples fast.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Future of Writing in a World of Artificial Intelligence #ChatGPT

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Back in December, I showed ChatGPT to a friend of mine who is also a professor. “I’m not worried about AI in my humanities courses,” she said. “Not at all?” She shook her head. “I know of colleagues