Verified by 
Parents, educators and policy-makers need to think quickly about finding the best way to teach and assess kids in this new era of artificial intelligence (AI). ChatGPT is a powerful tool of learning and a huge reservoir of knowledge. Instead of banning it, I would suggest that educators learn about the technology, along with its strengths and weaknesses, and teach their learners how to use it effectively and honestly.
Anyone with an internet connection, including children and teenagers, can sign up online to use ChatGPT. They can then ask the bot for the information that is needed to complete a task, including homework, writing an essay, a speech, or even a legal contract. This throws the educational system into disarray because children and teens can short-circuit the meaningful process of learning by asking their computers to complete their scholastic tasks and assignments for them. Sometimes schoolwork generated by ChatGPT is handed in to the school as if it is the learner's own work — plagiarism in the extreme. Because of this, learning and the educational process urgently needs to be rethought. Also, ChatGPT itself is not without its dangers and limitations.
- Firstly, ChatGPT can be wrong! Sometimes it will provide incorrect answers, misinformation, or outdated information. It also will only tell you what its programming enables it to. The most appropriate sources of information (for example, expert theorists and evidence-based research) may not be reflected in the content that ChatGPT returns. One way around this is to instruct the chatbot which sources (authors or particular research articles) to use. ChatGPT users are also able to paste relevant information to the chatbot with a request that the answer contains information from that content.
- If students become too reliant on ChatGPT, they may become less independent and less able to find information on their own. The academic process involves reading a wide range of content, searching for appropriate research, and looking in the right places for relevant and suitable material. Engaging with the task and formulating one's own ideas is a crucial part of learning. ChatGPT answers should be only a small part of a scholarly process.
- Critical thinking and problem-solving skills would not develop if young people were to use ChatGPT in a way that is too simplistic. Merely asking a chatbot to write an assignment is a shortcut to putting in the time and effort required for any scholarly task
- There may be privacy concerns associated with the use of AI language models. Some may collect data on students' activities and behaviors, and this data may be used for commercial or other purposes without students' knowledge or consent.
- ChatGPT is not a person and it does not give a child the embodied experience of learning from other human beings. The process of gathering information from technology is usually solitary. Social skills and human connection aren't required when you ask a chatbot for information. The complexity of relating to other human beings can be hard to navigate and children need to practice it. Too much time interacting with computers instead of other people could lead to mental, social and emotional difficulties.
The benefits of ChatGPT for children and teenagers
- Children can learn a lot from ChatGPT, including skills related to sport, music, languages, reading and writing.
- ChatGPT can provide students with access to a wealth of information on a wide range of topics. This can be particularly useful for students who do not have access to a large library or who have difficulty finding information on their own.
- ChatGPT can provide students with instant feedback on their questions and answers. This can be helpful for students who need immediate clarification on a topic or who are struggling with a particular concept.
- ChatGPT can be a fun and engaging way for students to learn. The chatbot can be customized to suit the needs of the student and can provide a personalized learning experience.
The way forward for education with ChatGPT
I believe the answer is to teach students about ChatGPT rather than forbid it. Lessons in plagiarism, honesty and when not to trust AI should be part of today's education. Whilst it's easy to ask a chatbot to write you an essay about a particular topic, it's much more important to read what the technology provides as an answer, and to critically evaluate how you can improve, refine, reject and add to what Chat GPT has offered. In this way, AI can serve as a starting point for a school project. It may offer ideas, insights and a platform for thinking. But it is not a substitute for a child's own unique work or for human thinking. Learners need to research other sources, cross-check information, and not assume that what they find on ChatGPT is accurate or suitable for their assignment. The learner's own critical thinking extends way beyond that of AI. She needs to use her own mind and argue her own points. ChatGPT also doesn't appear to provide references unless the user asks it to. The user has to know what authors are experts in the field of study that she is writing about.
Clearly, ChatGPT can be misused, especially when children and students pretend that the information given to them by the chatbot was their own. But this dishonesty says more about the human being's behavior than the technology. If educators ban the use of ChatGPT, some children will ignore the ban and use the technology secretly—disadvantaging those kids who obey the rules forbidding its use. A much more helpful educational process would be to teach children how to harness the positive aspects of ChatGPT and use it alongside other sources (authors, experts, reports, websites, evidence-based research and literature). Kids need to learn that ChatGPT cannot often be trusted because it can get things wrong.
When new technology looks set to change the world it can be frightening as it forces us to change our thinking. But part of education is about facing and managing progress, change, and development rather than resisting it. So I suggest we use ChatGPT but also interrogate and criticise it. At the same time, put the human before the robot and don't give AI the final say.
