Reflection #3

Some of the biggest limitations to GenAI that I consider to be critical, especially in the field of education, are the limitations of critical thinking, creativity, and judgement. Critical thinking is a skill that is exceptionally important for all people to have, especially in the world we live in today where it is so easy for misinformation to be spread. By using GenAI as a tool for answering questions and having work done for the user, a limitation is set against the use of critical thinking which is developed and built through the work one does through their own hard work and research. In addition to this, by relying on a service to craft answers for you that are not always true instead of forming your own opinions based on research, you fall victim to being led to believe information that may not be true and therefore stunting your growth as a person.

This idea is furthered by the limitations of using GenAI as a creative outlet. We as humans have a beautiful gift in that we are able to think with our diverse minds and create things that cannot and should not be created by AI. How sad would it be to live in a world in which all the music, art, literature, and inventions of our time are created not by the individual voices of great minds within our world but instead by a computer that has no soul. Creativity is something that is and should be limited through the use of GenAI.

One of the largest drawbacks and limitations of GenAI in my opinion is its ability to act as an echo chamber to its users. From the research I have done and seen, GenAI is programmed to be biased to its user and the user’s preformed opinions. Though there are ways to generate responses that may not be as biased, the average user of GenAI most likely does not train their responses to be unbiased, allowing the tool to act as an echo chamber of the user’s opinions. This lends back to the limitation of critical thinking as well as users’ ability to utilize their better judgements. This echo chamber effect can also be detrimental to the health of GenAI users, specifically the most vulnerable such as youth who are depressed and rely on GenAI as a crutch which feeds them back their negative thoughts.

There are very large issues around the responsible use of GenAI that have made me personally very against the use of GenAI, something I have never and do not ever wish to use both as a teacher and as my own person. Not only is GenAI very detrimental to the environment whilst being used for non-necessary reasons, it is also a negative, limiting tool to important skills that all people should have as I have already discussed. In addition to this, I find the use of GenAI in the classroom to be extremely violating to the privacy of students and their information as well as intellectual property. GenAI feeds off the information it is inputted and uses it for its development, essentially stripping the user of any ownership they had of their information once they use the tool. Not only is this bad enough but to use the information of students, a vulnerable sector of people who already have little control over their own lives and property, feels incredibly violating. It is for these reasons amid others that I believe there are very few if any places for responsible GenAI use in classrooms.

I have included below a discussion on AI by Hank Green that I found to be very interesting and informative.