ChatGPT.

It isn’t changing the classroom.

It changed the classroom.

Past tense.

The urgency that has frequently accompanied this realisation has often been directed on discussions concerned about what students will be doing with it, particularly in relation to assessments. And fair enough too. How do we accurately determine a student’s understanding if the means to assess that understanding has been essentially outsourced to something like ChatGPT? I’ve been pondering the use of ChatGPT in the classroom, the type of tool that it can be for the teacher and student. These are just some of my own initial thoughts as both a teacher and a researcher.

In my own discipline of History, it would appear that many teachers have welcomed ChatGPT as a much-needed catalyst for assessment. It has compelled conversations about how a student’s historical thinking might be tested, enabling conditions for the development of a fresher approach to engaging students in key questions about studying the past. But these conversations are still in their infancy. If anything, they show that as teachers and students increase familiarity with ChatGPT there will be more certainty about how to integrate ChatGPT into the classroom.

My own interactions with ChatGPT in the classroom have so far proved positive. It has been the source of solid discussions with students about what constitutes quality in historical thinking and writing. Recently, I selected a sample answer provided to me by a student to put up on the screen to add depth to the conversation about the topic the class was tackling. It was evident that the student had used ChatGPT to write this answer! Rather than rejecting the sample answer as invalid, I turned the situation to his and to the class’ advantage. The learning moment that followed lasted 40-minutes as the pros and cons of the submitted answer were scrutinised. What worked well? What needed improving? The writing had a clear structure, but it lacked historical sources. The answer had good examples, but it needed a deeper level of detail. Students were able to suggest solutions to these deficiencies, as well as take the opportunity to explain why they thought the positives were good takeaways to remember and use later.

As a researcher, my mind drifts towards the students and their perspective. Much of the reaction to ChatGPT in the classroom has been, it would appear to me, centred on teacher-reactions and teacher-concerns. Teacher-centric, perhaps, would be a better way of putting it. However, what of the student in all of this? Are they not a key stakeholder in the (monumental) change to learning that ChatGPT brought about? How are students going to do History (in my case) in light of the ongoing changes to learning, teaching and schooling that AIs like ChatGPT wil continue to bring? I would think so. To that end, the researcher in me wants to know how students see ChatGPT, how it figures in their thinking and the degree to which they see it the same way as their teachers. Assuming there are different perspectives that are identified by such questions, how do we reconcile them so the use of AI in education can be effective and productive?

ChatGPT has changed the classroom. There is no doubt about that. As a teacher, I can see that this change can be embraced. As a researcher, I can see there are many questions to pose and to consider as policies about ChatGPT’s use (and for that matter the use of AI in schools) emerge. As a teacher, I see ChatGPT enabling more powerful conversations in the classroom to be had as well as historical thinking and writing to develop. As a researcher, ChatGPT has opened another avenue to understand the changes in learning, teaching and schooling being experienced by the present generation of student.