Outrage over ChatGPT Edu is absurd – The Hofstra Chronicle
In September, Hofstra University President Susan Poser announced that students would be gaining access to ChatGPT Edu through the school. This announcement was met with criticism from the student body, who have made their disdain known.
I believe that many criticisms of the addition of ChatGPT Edu are not only misguided, but also flat out ridiculous.
To start, I do not support generative artificial intelligence (AI) as it pertains to generating images and videos. Creative fields are special because they have something that AI will always lack: creativity. There is nothing creative about entering a prompt into a website. That being said, broadly grouping ChatGPT Edu with generative AI is not an accurate representation of what the service aims to provide.
ChatGPT Edu is an enhanced version of ChatGPT that gives users access to the latest Generative Pre-trained Transformer (GPT) model – GPT-5 as of right now – and the ability to make custom GPTs, doing so without collecting user data to train other AI models.
It is not hard to see how an AI platform as advanced as ChatGPT could be utilized in an academic setting. Often it seems like we only hear about it in academia when used to cheat. However, there are plenty of ethical ways to use AI in the classroom.
Speaking from personal experience, I have used it in the past to separate data in spreadsheets, categorize items for projects and create personalized quizzes for myself based on in-class readings. There are plenty of uses for AI without towing the line of academic dishonesty.
On the topic of academic dishonesty, many detractors like to point out that Hofstra embracing AI is encouraging students to do that very thing: violate academic integrity. However, the base version of ChatGPT is a free product that already has the capability to do that very thing. If a student wanted to make AI do their homework for them, they already can and probably already do without the need for ChatGPT Edu.
AI has also become such a large part of our everyday lives that you would be remiss to find anyone who has not used it or thought about using it. To act like Hofstra is the reason a student would use AI maliciously in an academic setting is ignorant.
It is also ignorant to completely block AI from your education. Yes, it depends on the field you plan to enter, but I would venture to guess that most people will be entering a job field after college where AI plays some sort of role in their job.
Whether you like it or not, a majority of the workforce will incorporate some sort of AI in its day-to-day operations from now until the next major technological innovation comes along. If anything, Hofstra exposing us to AI now is an advantage towards us students as potential job candidates.
There are plenty of real reasons to not like AI, specifically if you have concerns about its detriment to the environment. According to the Harvard Business Review, training a large language model can match the carbon emissions of hundreds of American homes. While those concerns are valid, blaming the consumer for those emissions is misguided. The blame should fall solely on the corporations who enable their products to do as much harm to the environment as they do.
The point I am trying to make is simple: you don’t have to like AI or use it in your personal life, but to not expose yourself to it at all is doing yourself a disservice as a student. Hofstra is giving us a great opportunity to utilize it in an academic setting at no extra cost to us.
There is more to the AI bubble than just Sora-generated Ring camera videos and making Peter Griffin say something outlandish. Now is the time to embrace the many functions of AI instead of plugging your ears and refusing to listen.
Your donation will support the student journalists of Hofstra University. Your contribution will allow us to purchase equipment and cover our annual website hosting costs.
Hofstra University's Newspaper of Record
Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *
