Title: AI Tools in Education: A Generation Divide Emerges as ChatGPT Challenges Traditional Learning Methods
In a thought-provoking discussion at Fortune’s Brainstorm Tech conference, generational attitudes towards artificial intelligence (AI) in the classroom were flipped on their head. Nadya Okamoto, a recent Harvard graduate and founder of non-profit organization Period, confronted Dan Rosensweig, the CEO of edtech company Chegg, over the widespread use of AI tools like ChatGPT and its impact on academic integrity.
Okamoto, a member of Generation Z, questioned the true purpose of AI tools like ChatGPT, suggesting that they primarily serve as shortcuts for completing homework assignments rather than fostering genuine curiosity and active engagement with course materials. Sharing her own experience as a Chegg user during her junior year at Harvard, Okamoto revealed that she resorted to the platform because it provided convenient answers, leading her to adopt the mindset of C’s get degrees.
Rosensweig, a baby boomer, offered a different perspective. As the CEO of Chegg, he emphasized that the platform was created to support students who may not have access to the same resources as those attending elite universities. Rosensweig expressed his concern for students striving to improve their lives through education, highlighting the struggles of those who work multiple jobs or have familial responsibilities that divert their attention from academic pursuits. He argued that Chegg’s target demographic consists of self-motivated learners who need to graduate with tangible skills.
During the conversation, Rosensweig also announced Chegg’s foray into generative AI with their virtual study assistant called Cheggmate. The company aims to personalize learning experiences by tailoring the content to individual students’ preferred language, learning style, and proficiency level. Although ChatGPT and similar tools serve a broader range of applications, Rosensweig emphasized the benefits of an AI tool specifically designed to aid students with their schoolwork.
Okamoto’s skepticism stemmed from her concern that such tools may discourage students from actively engaging with their coursework and hinder their genuine pursuit of knowledge. However, Rosensweig argued that traditional academic institutions must take responsibility for failing to update their curricula and professors for not creating more challenging exam questions that go beyond the capabilities of AI prompts.
The conversation exemplified the growing divide between generations when it comes to embracing AI in education. Nadya Okamoto raised valid concerns about the potential unintended consequences of AI tools, highlighting the importance of active student participation and curiosity-driven learning. Dan Rosensweig defended the use of AI tools like Chegg, stressing the necessity of providing support for students who may face unique challenges in their educational journeys.
Ultimately, the debate between Okamoto and Rosensweig highlights the need to strike a balance between utilizing AI tools as valuable aids in education while ensuring that they do not become substitutes for active learning and critical thinking. While AI tools like ChatGPT and Cheggmate can provide assistance, it is crucial for educational institutions and students alike to prioritize deep engagement with course materials to extract meaningful knowledge.
