Matthew A. Vetter , Brent Lucia , Jialei Jiang , Mahmoud Othman
{"title":"Towards a framework for local interrogation of AI ethics: A case study on text generators, academic integrity, and composing with ChatGPT","authors":"Matthew A. Vetter , Brent Lucia , Jialei Jiang , Mahmoud Othman","doi":"10.1016/j.compcom.2024.102831","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Ethical frameworks for text generators (TGs) in education are generally concerned with personalized instruction, a dependency on data, biases in training data, academic integrity, and lack of creativity from students. While broad-level, institutional guidelines provide value in understanding the ethical dimensions of artificial intelligence (AI) for the classroom, there is a need for a more ecological understanding of how AI ethics might be constructed locally, one that takes into account the negotiation of AI between teacher and student. This article investigates how an educational ethical framework for AI use emerges through a qualitative case study of one composition student's interaction with and understanding of using ChatGPT as a type of writing partner. Analysis of interview data and student logs uncover what we term an emergent “local ethic” – a framework that is capable of exploring unique ethical considerations, values, and norms that develop at the most foundational unit of higher education – the individual classroom. Our framework is meant to provide a heuristic for other writing teacher-scholars as they interrogate issues related to pedagogy, student criticality, agency, reliability, and access within the context of powerful AI systems.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":35773,"journal":{"name":"Computers and Composition","volume":"71 ","pages":"Article 102831"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S8755461524000070/pdfft?md5=ccba5f358a3dca6d3ecad3848e7405a0&pid=1-s2.0-S8755461524000070-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Computers and Composition","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S8755461524000070","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Ethical frameworks for text generators (TGs) in education are generally concerned with personalized instruction, a dependency on data, biases in training data, academic integrity, and lack of creativity from students. While broad-level, institutional guidelines provide value in understanding the ethical dimensions of artificial intelligence (AI) for the classroom, there is a need for a more ecological understanding of how AI ethics might be constructed locally, one that takes into account the negotiation of AI between teacher and student. This article investigates how an educational ethical framework for AI use emerges through a qualitative case study of one composition student's interaction with and understanding of using ChatGPT as a type of writing partner. Analysis of interview data and student logs uncover what we term an emergent “local ethic” – a framework that is capable of exploring unique ethical considerations, values, and norms that develop at the most foundational unit of higher education – the individual classroom. Our framework is meant to provide a heuristic for other writing teacher-scholars as they interrogate issues related to pedagogy, student criticality, agency, reliability, and access within the context of powerful AI systems.
期刊介绍:
Computers and Composition: An International Journal is devoted to exploring the use of computers in writing classes, writing programs, and writing research. It provides a forum for discussing issues connected with writing and computer use. It also offers information about integrating computers into writing programs on the basis of sound theoretical and pedagogical decisions, and empirical evidence. It welcomes articles, reviews, and letters to the Editors that may be of interest to readers, including descriptions of computer-aided writing and/or reading instruction, discussions of topics related to computer use of software development; explorations of controversial ethical, legal, or social issues related to the use of computers in writing programs.