Perhaps our fear of the unknown prevents us from seeing the countless possibilities and realities that exist beyond our “cave.” To put it bluntly, we educators have some difficulty incorporating innovations—whether technological or not—into education. This may be one of the reasons for the controversies surrounding the ChatGPT, which has caused concern and had an impact on various educational institutions and organizations.

The wider access to computers in society—and inevitably in education—and later to other technologies and tools, did not generate all that much discussion or uproar. Perhaps Word raised concerns about students’ writing accuracy; copy-and-paste, used via Google and websites, “corrupted” the act of writing assignments; Siri and Alexa began providing easy answers to various questions for a wide range of reasons.

Multiliteracies have never been widely implemented in schools and universities. Sometimes more, sometimes less, here and there, but always with caveats. We evaluate, introduce, and implement almost everything, but when innovation touches on the textual language widely used by teachers, perhaps that is when the fear of the unknown proves strongest—the fear of change, of seeing new possibilities, of reinventing the modus operandi of education.

What is most troubling right now is “textual language”—the most persistent challenge for education as a whole and for educators in particular. This is because textual language, which is present in the pedagogical relationship between educators and students, can be intimidating precisely because it is the most familiar and widely used form of language.

The initial backlash against ChatGPT was widespread in the world of text. So much so that, out of concern, the Paris Institute of Political Studies (Sciences Po) and the New York City Department of Education banned the use of ChatGPT, reportedly anticipating negative effects on their students’ learning.

Due to a lack of knowledge about artificial intelligence—and even more so about generative ChatGPT—I get the impression that technological disruption in education is a warning sign pointing to a deeper malaise that calls into question concepts, procedures, and behaviors that have been firmly established within society for millennia.

Some educators, such as Dora Kaufman, a professor and researcher at PUC-SP, add to the debate that banning ChatGPT is not the solution; rather, it should be tried out, both inside and outside the classroom.

The arrival of ChatGPT, with its widespread access to the general public, teachers, and students, seems to have sparked a desire in some for a return to oral assessment in various educational settings. It’s not that the (re)introduction of oral assessment in education is a bad thing, but the problem lies in the approach and the motivation. Or perhaps it’s a fear of the unknown, stemming precisely from a lack of understanding about artificial intelligence.

Everything in education can and should be reevaluated, rethought, relearned, and—on an ongoing basis—learned throughout one’s life. Inexorable progress and innovation enable undeniable advances. Perhaps this is the dawn of a new era in education that can bring more benefits than educational or learning setbacks.

Combining these new experiences with the lessons learned over the centuries will likely yield positive results. Let us recall two extraordinary situations from which humanity and educational institutions were able to learn.

Socrates (470 B.C. – 399 B.C.), the Greek philosopher, taught by asking question after question, and the dialogue was not written but oral. Not surprisingly, for millennia the big (and Socratic) question has been: Why didn’t Socrates write? There is no definitive answer, but what is certain is that Socrates did not believe writing was the best method of teaching. It’s worth noting here that Classical Greece had a very strong oral culture, and most ideas were taught through dialogue between teacher and student.

While ChatGPT today encourages us to seek answers, Paulo Freire taught us long ago that it is “time to ask questions.” By asking questions, we denounce injustices and herald a new society, in order to foster critical thinking among individuals and communities alike.

Paulo Freire’s pedagogy of questioning is a teaching approach that encourages learning through questions. Freire said that learning should be a process of discovery, and the best way to discover is by asking questions. Instead of providing students with ready-made answers, teachers should create a learning environment in which students can ask questions and explore their own ideas. Because questioning is an interactive process between teachers and students, in which teachers stimulate students’ curiosity and creativity, allowing them to develop their own understanding of the world.

Increasingly, teachers are facilitators—guides who help students discover knowledge on their own. Teachers will never be replaced, but rather supported by and through innovation. The entire suite of tools and technologies surrounding ChatGPT will be improved and will become more refined and more specific. What we need to take advantage of in this wave is to rethink our purpose. How can we promote the use of such a tool for something that isn’t yet being done in schools?

The dichotomy of right or wrong, or good or bad, does not apply in this context. It is not possible to make judgments based on a past perspective or past references. We must create new contexts and experiences based on what is new.

Perhaps ChatGPT has taught us that school can also be a place to prepare students to formulate good questions—rather than simply providing the correct answers to the questions posed by educators. The more thoughtfully crafted the question—using critical thinking, reasoning, logic, and a critical perspective—the better ChatGPT’s ability to respond will be. 

I believe that no one is reinventing the wheel, much less the Socratic method. Probably, if we accept the axiom attributed to Socrates—“I know only that I know nothing, and the fact that I know this gives me an advantage over those who think they know something”—it may allow us to acknowledge our ignorance and, by being open to learning and relearning, pave the way for knowledge.

About the author:

Did you like this article? Share it on your social media: