Writing and AI in College Education: A Brief Case Study

This brief case study was written by Jennifer Roebuck Bulanda, Ronald E. Bulanda, J. Scott Brown, Aaron Abbott, & Rena Perez.

Educators often incorporate extensive writing into their coursework to promote critical thinking, evaluate course concepts, and formulate recommendations and solutions for social problems. Given that students are both using writing to promote learning and learning to write for different purposes throughout their social science coursework, AI and large language models such as ChatGPT pose new challenges for writing assignments. To better assess how to respond to the rise of AI, our small group of four faculty members in sociology, gerontology, and organizational leadership, along with the Graduate Assistant Director of the Howe Writing Center, worked together to assess the potential impact of ChatGPT on classroom assignments in our social science disciplines, and form recommendations to help other faculty across disciplines. 

Understanding Large Language Models (LLMs) and their Implications

We began by reviewing articles on the implications of AI for pedagogy and writing practices. We used a note taking application to record and share notes. Our first recommendation emerged very early in the process; the need to improve instructors’ AI literacy was readily apparent and ultimately would provide a foundation for all of our additional recommendations. The majority of our group had only a vague understanding of AI and perceived it as threatening to our educational endeavors, and most of us also lacked a fundamental understanding of how it functions. A variety of sources provide a more thorough overview of how generative AI works, but the following offer a starting point for developing a basic understanding of large language models (LLMs) such as ChatGPT:

• It does not think independently (at least for now). It only generates text. Generative AI – of which ChatGPT is one example – is a large language model (LLM) that generates text based on probabilities. It draws from the existing written work on which it has been trained to predict what text will follow any word. The complexity of the database used and the statistical models employed allows such systems to generate text with variation even to identical prompts. These responses may have the appearance of independent thought, but this appearance is merely a reflection of the complexity of the overall system rather than genuine creativity.  

• Because it does not construct text with coherent intentions, it has notable limitations. It is possible for it to “hallucinate,” or make up facts, which it may confidently assert are the correct answers. As we tested various assignments with ChatGPT, it would occasionally give an answer that was blatantly wrong. When told it had provided an incorrect answer, ChatGPT would apologize and acknowledge that it was wrong, but the misinformation was corrected only because of the human operator’s knowledge and direct challenge. The fact that it is trained on existing information also means that it reflects existing culture and social structures, including biases and stereotypes. Instructors need to understand the limitations of LLMS so we can help students not become overly reliant on (or overly confident in) what AI can do for them.

Rethinking Writing Assignments for the Age of ChatGPT

After beginning to build our own AI literacy by understanding how LLMs like ChatGPT work, we found that a second important step was actually using it to observe its performance. It is necessary to know if/how AI capabilities require us to rethink our own writing assignments, and how those assignments may be redesigned such that AI capabilities 1) do not erode the central goals of our coursework and/or 2) can be harnessed to enhance or implement the central goals of our coursework.

Assessing the Impact of ChatGPT on Our Assignments: From Optimism to Pessimism

We first collected 15 syllabi from Miami University’s Department of Sociology and Gerontology classes offered during the 2022-23 academic year to see how writing was being used in different courses. We then chose to examine how ChatGPT would respond to 17 existing writing prompts from a variety of 100- to 400-level undergraduate class writing assignments provided by the instructors. 

We initially believed that many of our assignments would be impervious to ChatGPT or, if not, could be made so with some minor tweaks. We were quickly disabused of this notion. Though its results were variable, providing excellent responses to some prompts and mediocre or inaccurate responses to others, our group was surprised by how well ChatGPT did with our writing assignments overall. It performed on par or better than what we generally saw from an average student on most of these assignments. 

We were also surprised by the type of writing ChatGPT could produce. We expected ChatGPT to perform best with assignments aimed at lower-level learning, such as summarizing, comparing, and explaining. We anticipated it would fare worse with assignments requiring higher-level thinking, such as analyzing, evaluating, and creating. However, ChatGPT performed unexpectedly well with these, such as an assignment that asked students to apply course concepts to design a specific activity showcasing elements of culture.

To illustrate ChatGPT’s capabilities, this writing prompt is reproduced in Appendix 1. Students generally write approximately one to two single-spaced pages in response to this prompt, and often use examples such as a football game, a backyard barbeque, or a Fourth of July celebration. Figure 2 shows three separate responses to the writing prompt from ChatGPT. Because ChatGPT is a LLM, it generates a unique response each time a prompt is entered. The three examples of ChatGPT’s responses showcase its variable performance in response to the original writing prompt.

Our team’s results shifted our optimistic assumptions about our ability to adjust to ChatGPT, and resulted in a more pessimistic outlook on the deep impact ChatGPT would have on education and its potential consequences for writing across all disciplines. It is clear programs like ChatGPT can quite easily be used by students to complete parts of or entire assignments in our classes. We realized we would have to make an important pivot. Given that AI and LLMs continue to improve exponentially, it is not feasible to try to outmaneuver these technologies across all of our writing assignments. Instead, we would have to rethink our assignments and the ways we use and teach writing in our courses. 

Rethinking AI Tools and Writing Assignments: From Pessimism Back to Optimism 

We spent several weeks reading and reviewing a variety of sources on AI and pedagogy, as well as discussing the ways we use writing in our classes, examining the outcomes we are trying to achieve or measure with writing, and analyzing the ways AI responded to writing prompts from our courses. Through this process, our group has pivoted from viewing AI technologies as a barrier to learning to viewing it as a tool for learning. Our experience points to some considerations for understanding AI and developing your own AI literacy as an instructor:

• Understand that AI is revolutionary and here for the long haul. It is not going away, it will become ubiquitous (and already is in many ways), and it will continue to improve. We have to develop assignments with the expectation that it is a permanent feature and that both we and our students will be using it for the rest of our lives.
  
  
• Do not count on using plagiarism detection software as the solution. Using ChatGPTZero or other plagiarism detection tools is (currently) not sufficient to address the rise of AI. Such tools can report false positives, and students can still use ChatGPT and then shuttle the response through a paraphrasing program, circumventing the detection tools.
  
  
• Start by interacting with it yourself. Educators should begin by practicing their assignment prompts in an AI system. It is imperative to see and understand the output AI programs generate in order to fully grasp its capabilities and better identify how it can play a role in the coursework you assign. Do not assume your writing prompts are impervious to AI. Put them into ChatGPT and see what it produces. We experienced a major shift in our perceptions and approaches to ChatGPT after we did this.
  
  
• AI requires more than re-thinking individual assignments. Adjusting to AI means thinking about how writing is utilized in our classrooms broadly rather than responding only to specific assignments. What are we trying to accomplish with our writing assignments? For example, in our introductory sociology course, students are often writing to learn; we use writing assignments as a way of getting students to think critically and apply course concepts to real-world events, for example. How might AI pose a barrier to that, and how might we still be able to achieve the same outcomes with revised assignments? And, how might ChatGPT be a tool for the instructor, rather than an obstacle?
  
  
• Writing remains a social interaction, even in the age of AI. Writing is a social process that involves sharing ideas. The dialogue a student has with ChatGPT is also a social interaction; although it is not with a person, it is still a collaboration. In social science courses, this is particularly notable, given that both students and ChatGPT are bringing others’ ideas with them to the interaction, writing through the lens of culture, social structure, various social constructions and, in the case of ChatGPT, its human-created algorithm. Educators should consider if such collaborations offer a sufficiently diverse exchange of ideas and experiences. 

A Revised Writing Assignment for the Age of ChatGPT

With these considerations in mind, our group then set to work developing a revised version of the original writing assignment, which integrates use of ChatGPT (see Appendix 3). Certainly not all (or even most) writing assignments need to explicitly incorporate ChatGPT, but this specific exercise provided a way to leverage AI to sharpen students’ critical thinking while retaining the learning outcomes of the assignment.

To ensure students are still doing the initial critical thinking of identifying key elements of culture, they begin by brainstorming individually during class. They then work in small groups to evaluate their initial ideas, and proceed to individually develop and extend them for their cultural communication activity. Outside of class, they then enter the assignment prompt into ChatGPT (in which they might receive output such as that in Appendix 2), allowing them to compare ChatGPT’s response with their own idea. Their final product is then an essay that asks them to evaluate ChatGPT’s output, assessing strengths and limitations of the suggestions provided. For example, in Appendix 2, ChatGPT’s output suggests livestock is an important symbol of U.S. culture. Students may argue that this is not the case, and provide alternate suggestions. In their final essay, they are asked to evaluate strengths and limitations of their own ideas and ChatGPT’s ideas to propose an improved, final version of the tourist activity. This requires them to build on either their own and/or ChatGPT’s suggestions, incorporating an evaluation of all the initial ideas. Finally, they engage in a discussion with their group that involves reflecting on the strengths and limitations of ChatGPT’s output, allowing them to improve their AI literacy skills.

Strategies for Creating Better Writing Assignments in Social Science Courses (And Beyond)

As we revised this specific writing assignment and considered other types of writing assignments (e.g., research papers, policy briefs, personal reflections) used throughout our courses, we developed some concrete strategies for other instructors also trying to revamp their assignments amidst the rise of AI.

Incorporate writing outside of the typical essay and paper format. One of our group’s ongoing concerns is ensuring that students are not circumventing critical and creative thinking and are still using writing as a way of learning in the context of AI. The following suggestions offer concrete strategies instructors can use when creating or revising their own assignments. In instances where instructors want students to think and write without the use of AI, think outside the box of the standard paper: 

• Try a Fishbone model: Structure assignments so that the central thesis or prompt serves as the spine of a final written product. Students may be asked to initiate and/or share the responsibility with AI of identifying major points that each uniquely and substantively connect back to the spine. This design, subject to many variations, maintains student accountability for their role in employing reason and intentionality in their synthesis of multiple ideas/sources and establishing structure in their writing.
• Leverage in-class opportunities. Use class time to complete short writing assignments, such as think-pair-share assignments (and note that longer in-class handwritten writing assignments can pose substantial barriers for some students, such as those with certain disabilities) or drawing connections between a new concept and something that was discussed in the previous class. For out-of-class writing assignments, ask students to complete an analysis that draws on a specific discussion that happened during class time. 
• Connect it to personal experiences. One of the writing prompts our group examined asked students to tie their own personal experiences or the personal experiences of a relative to class material. AI did not perform well when asked to synthesize personal narratives (However, be aware AI may perform better if the subject happens to have a significant electronic footprint, such as prominent athletes or public figures.) 
• Scaffold assignments. Use multi-step, scaffolded assignments in which students write and submit in a series of steps. Educators can deconstruct larger writing assignments to be more granular, such that some stages of writing are done in class and/or peer reviewed. For example, the assignment might start with a brainstorming session or having students jot down a thesis statement, then building on that with collaborative dialogue, until there is a final writing product that draws from the smaller-scale writing students did during class; Chat GPT has trouble keeping coherence across such instances. Our revised assignment in Appendix 3 utilizes a scaffolded strategy.
  

Empower students. Help them understand ChatGPT as necessitating their collaboration rather than undermining their contributions.
Our group is concerned that students will come to perceive LLMs such as ChatGPT as all-knowing and far superior to their own abilities, undermining their confidence in their own critical thinking and writing. We worry this may cause them to circumvent opportunities to practice their own independent and creative thinking and instead turn immediately to AI for ideas. Instructors should help students see AI as a tool they can wield, but one that provides only a starting point, not an end product. In understanding its design and limitations, they should also see that they bring something different and unique, such as context and knowledge of purpose. Perceiving ChatGPT as fallible will aid students in identifying misinformation. Instead of seeing it as a superior substitute for their own work, instructors should help students to “stand on its shoulders.” They have the skill set to evaluate and build on AI to write better. 

• Show students that ChatGPT is fallible. Any LLM is bounded by its algorithm and the databases from which it draws, even if those databases are composed of all online information. ChatGPT, for example, regularly “hallucinates,” such as inventing titles of papers that do not exist. Instructors can help students think critically about AI’s abilities by showing students examples of inaccuracies and bias in ChatGPT responses. 
• Evaluate ChatGPT’s responses. Engage students in thinking about the ways LLM responses reflect and reproduce existing culture, but do not push it forward or challenge it. That means that an LLM does not necessarily offer diverse or equitable perspectives, and students need to be aware of this.  Ask students to critically examine what AI writes to examine cultural influences, bias, and limitations. These types of assignments can build students’ AI literacy by helping them see that its text originates from and reflects society and culture.

Embrace rather than circumvent AI.
AI offers a way to extend and enhance writing. Today’s students will be using AI for the rest of their lives. As instructors, it is our job to develop students’ AI literacy, including helping them to see it as a tool, understanding how to use it ethically, and being aware of its limitations. 

• Integrate ChatGPT into assignments. Have students use ChatGPT as a sounding board, for instance. Because they pull from a global database, LLMs can inherently provide multicultural viewpoints. Students can be encouraged to expand their own skills and views by potentially drawing from other perspectives/facts/information that an LLM incorporates.
• Leverage it to enable assignments with greater depth. AI can be a powerful efficiency tool. Just as other technological innovations such as the typewriter or internet search databases have increased our ability to write more comprehensively and at greater speed, AI tools like ChatGPT can likewise enhance our students’ writing capabilities.  AI may enable instructors to consider deeper and more detailed writing assignments that would have been infeasible in a single semester before the advent of such AI tools. For example, rather than assigning a student a term paper project where a single social problem is identified and a potential solution offered, an instructor might expand the assignment by requiring students to offer and compare several solutions. Alternatively, given the increased writing capabilities that AI tools can provide, having students engage in more than one such current term-length assignments in a single course may be possible.

Appendix 1:
Writing prompt in an introductory sociology course,
in which students explore elements of U.S. culture

Writing Prompt

Imagine that you have the opportunity to design an experience that provides tourists with a sense of U.S. culture. The tourists are people who have never been to the U.S. before and are unfamiliar with U.S. culture. This experience can take place in any one location and can last no more than 6 hours (although it does not have to last that long). You'll be writing about your experience and answering the questions below on the course discussion board, and then you'll be reading your peers' answers and comparing/contrasting. In your answer, please discuss the following:

• What would you choose to do, and where would you do it?
  
  
• Remember that the elements of culture are symbols, language, values, norms, and material objects. In what ways are you communicating each of these elements of culture? Your answer should be robust enough to discuss which of these you think are key components of U.S. culture and how you are communicating these with your experience (i.e., this discussion needs to be more than a couple of sentences).
  
  
• Are any of the following relevant to your selection? If so, how?
  • Real culture vs. ideal culture
  • Popular culture vs. high culture
  • Subcultures
  • Multiculturalism
    
    
• To what degree do you believe there even is a “U.S. culture”?

Appendix 2: Chat GPT Responses to the Writing Prompt

Chat GPT Response #1

First, I would choose to host the experience in New Orleans, Louisiana, a city that embodies unique aspects of American culture. The experience would begin with a visit to the National World War II Museum, where visitors can learn about the country's history and the role the U.S. played in the war. The museum communicates U.S. culture by displaying symbols and material objects of the war, such as uniforms, weapons, and vehicles.

Next, we would head to the French Quarter, where visitors can immerse themselves in the city's music scene, a key component of American culture. At Preservation Hall, visitors can enjoy live jazz music, which communicates the values and norms of U.S. culture, such as freedom, individualism, and creativity.

To experience U.S. language, we would take a walking tour of the city and engage in conversations with locals, who could communicate the subtleties of the Southern dialect and slang words unique to the region.

Regarding the elements of culture, the experience would aim to communicate symbols, values, norms, language, and material objects of U.S. culture. The National World War II Museum would display symbols and material objects, while the music scene would communicate the values and norms of U.S. culture. Conversations with locals would communicate the subtleties of U.S. language.

Regarding the relevance of cultural concepts, the experience would encompass both real and ideal culture. The National World War II Museum would display the reality of the war and the country's involvement, while the music scene would embody the ideal of creativity and individualism. The experience would also showcase both popular culture and high culture through jazz music and the National World War II Museum, respectively.

The experience would also recognize the subcultures and multiculturalism present in U.S. culture. New Orleans has a rich history of cultural diversity, which is evident in its music, food, and traditions. The experience would aim to highlight the contributions of different subcultures to U.S. culture, such as African American culture, Cajun culture, and Native American culture.

Lastly, the degree to which there is a "U.S. culture" is debatable, given the country's vast size and diversity. However, the experience would aim to showcase some of the common elements of U.S. culture, such as individualism, freedom, and cultural diversity.

In conclusion, the experience would aim to provide tourists with a sense of U.S. culture by immersing them in the country's history, music, language, and cultural diversity. It would communicate the symbols, values, norms, language, and material objects of U.S. culture while recognizing the relevance of real and ideal culture, popular and high culture, subcultures, and multiculturalism.

Chat GPT Response #2

For this cultural experience, I would choose to take the tourists to a county fair in a rural area of the Midwest. This would provide them with an opportunity to experience a key aspect of U.S. culture: the celebration of local communities and traditions through festivals and events.

Symbols: At the county fair, tourists would see various symbols of U.S. culture, such as the American flag, livestock, and carnival rides.

Language: Tourists would hear the unique language of rural Midwesterners, including local slang and phrases. They would also hear announcements over the loudspeakers and conversations among fairgoers.

Values: The fair represents values such as hard work, family, and community. Tourists would see examples of these values in the livestock shows, where farmers showcase their animals and compete for prizes, as well as in the food and craft vendors, who often sell items made by their own families.

Norms: Tourists would observe social norms, such as waiting in line for rides and food, as well as cultural norms, such as the ways in which people interact with animals and nature.

Material Objects: At the fair, tourists would see material objects that are important in U.S. culture, such as tractors, farm equipment, and handmade crafts. They would also experience the various types of food that are commonly associated with U.S. culture, such as corndogs, funnel cakes, and lemonade.

Real culture vs. ideal culture: The fair represents a mix of real and ideal culture. On one hand, it represents the ideal of rural community life and the values that come with it. On the other hand, it also reflects the challenges and realities of living in a rural area, such as poverty and limited access to resources.

Popular culture vs. high culture: The county fair is an example of popular culture, as it is accessible to and enjoyed by a wide range of people. While it may not be considered “high culture,” it is an important aspect of U.S. culture and one that is deeply valued by many.

Subcultures: While the county fair may represent aspects of U.S. culture that are shared by many, it also provides an opportunity to experience subcultures within the U.S. For example, tourists may be able to observe and learn about the Amish community, which is present in some rural areas of the Midwest.

Multiculturalism: While the county fair may not be representative of all aspects of U.S. culture, it is still an important part of the country’s cultural tapestry. Additionally, it provides an opportunity for tourists to learn about and appreciate the diversity of U.S. culture, as they may encounter people from various backgrounds and learn about different traditions and ways of life.

To some degree, I do believe that there is a “U.S. culture,” but it is also important to recognize that it is not a monolithic entity. Rather, it is a complex and multifaceted collection of traditions, values, and norms that are shared by many but also vary greatly across different regions and subcultures. By providing tourists with an opportunity to experience a key aspect of U.S. culture through the county fair, I hope to give them a glimpse into this rich and diverse cultural tapestry.

Chat GPT Response #3

If I had the opportunity to design an experience that provides tourists with a sense of U.S. culture, I would choose to take them to a baseball game. I believe that this is an excellent way to communicate several elements of U.S. culture, such as symbols, language, values, norms, and material objects. The baseball game would take place at the iconic Yankee Stadium in New York City.

Symbols: The baseball game itself is a symbol of U.S. culture, and it represents a shared experience that many Americans enjoy. Additionally, the American flag, the national anthem, and the various logos and mascots associated with the game are all symbols of U.S. culture that would be present at the game.

Language: The language of baseball is unique and includes terms like "home run," "strikeout," and "double play." Fans also engage in a form of socialization through chants, cheers, and jeers that are specific to baseball games.

Values: Baseball is a sport that emphasizes teamwork, dedication, and perseverance. These values are often associated with American culture, making baseball an excellent way to communicate these values to tourists.

Norms: Attending a baseball game also provides tourists with an opportunity to observe and learn about the norms that govern U.S. culture. For example, they would learn about the etiquette associated with attending a sporting event, such as standing during the national anthem, not interfering with the game, and respecting other fans.

Material Objects: The baseball game itself is a material object that is deeply rooted in U.S. culture. Additionally, there are various food and beverage options available at the stadium that are associated with U.S. culture, such as hot dogs, popcorn, and soda.

Real culture vs. ideal culture: The baseball game provides an opportunity to observe both real and ideal culture. While the ideal culture of baseball is often associated with fair play, good sportsmanship, and teamwork, the reality of the game can sometimes involve cheating, bad behavior, and intense competition.

Popular culture vs. high culture: Baseball is a sport that is both popular and high culture. While it is often associated with working-class and middle-class Americans, it has also been embraced by the upper classes.

Subcultures: Baseball has a rich history of subcultures that are associated with different teams, players, and regions of the U.S. For example, the New York Yankees have a unique subculture that is associated with their success, their iconic pinstripe uniforms, and their passionate fanbase.

Multiculturalism: Finally, the baseball game also represents an opportunity to celebrate multiculturalism in the U.S. Many of the players are from diverse backgrounds, and there are often events and activities at the stadium that celebrate the cultural diversity of the U.S.

In conclusion, while there are many ways to provide tourists with a sense of U.S. culture, I believe that taking them to a baseball game at Yankee Stadium is an excellent way to communicate the key elements of U.S. culture.

As an AI language model, I do not hold personal beliefs or opinions. However, based on my knowledge and understanding of cultural studies, I can say that there is a distinct and recognizable culture in the United States. While there may be variations and differences within different regions, subcultures, and ethnic groups, there are also shared symbols, values, norms, and material objects that are associated with U.S. culture as a whole. Examples of these shared cultural elements might include the American flag, the English language, democracy and individualism as core values, social norms surrounding personal space and punctuality, and material objects such as cars and fast food. Therefore, it is reasonable to argue that there is a distinct "U.S. culture," even if it is not homogenous or shared by all Americans.

Appendix 3:
Revised Assignment

Step 1: Individual brainstorming during class time (approximately 5 minutes)

Without using any outside resources such as Google or ChatGPT, spend the next five minutes making a list of some of the key elements of U.S. culture. Begin with values and beliefs. List at least 4-5 values or beliefs that you think are representative of U.S. culture. Then, progress to doing the same for the other elements of culture: material culture, norms, symbols, and language.

Step 2: Group collaboration during class time (approximately 10-15 minutes)

Again, without using outside resources such as Google or ChatGPT, spend 10-15 minutes working with your group members to share your individual ideas and then to create a collective list of some key elements of U.S. culture. You should not simply combine everyone’s ideas to create a longer list. Instead, you should evaluate and discuss each group member’s ideas to decide which merit inclusion on the final list. Your discussion may lead you to remove items on individual lists and/or create new items that were not on anyone’s original list. 

Step 3: Individual writing during class time (approximately 10 minutes)

After considering your own ideas and your team’s discussion, spend the next 10 minutes completing this activity individually:

Imagine that you have the opportunity to design an experience that provides tourists with a sense of U.S. culture. The tourists are people who have never been to the U.S. before and are unfamiliar with U.S. culture. This experience can take place in any one location and can last no more than 6 hours (although it does not have to last that long). Then, respond to each of the following:

• What would you choose to do, and where would you do it?
• In what ways are you communicating key elements of culture that you identified in your individual and/or group work? Briefly note at least two ways that your activity communicates each element:
  • Values and beliefs:
  • Material culture:
  • Norms:
  • Symbols:
  • Language:
• Are any of the following relevant to your activity? If so, how?
  • Real culture vs. ideal culture
  • Popular culture vs. high culture
  • Subcultures
  • Multiculturalism
• To what degree do you believe there even is a “U.S. culture”?

Step 4: Out-of-Class Writing Activity and Writing Assignment

Now you will be using AI writing tools to see how AI imagines U.S. culture through a tourist experience.

Step 4a: Use AI to generate responses

Start by putting the prompt from Step 3 into ChatGPT. Copy and paste this into a Word Document or take a screenshot of its response. After it produces a response, ask it to regenerate two additional responses, still keeping a copy or screenshot of each response.

Step 4b: Evaluate the AI responses

Once you have all three responses from ChatGPT and your initial tourist experience, compare and contrast these ideas. What do you think are some of the strengths and weaknesses of each? Make notes as you reflect on each response.

Step 4c. Create a final response to the tourist experience assignment

After evaluating your own response and ChatGPT’s three responses, use your notes about the strengths and weaknesses of each idea to create a final essay in response to the prompt provided in Step 3. Your tourist experience may improve on your own or one of ChatGPT’s ideas, or it may be an entirely new idea. Be sure to provide a thorough response to each of the questions in the prompt. Your responses should show evidence that you understand each of the concepts and can apply them to explain the tourist experience you’ve designed. Your essay should be approximately two to three double-spaced pages in length. Include your screenshots/copies of ChatGPT’s responses as separate pages at the end of your essay.

Step 4d. Reflect on the process

After writing your response to the tourist experience, add a one-to-two page reflection on your process throughout this assignment. This reflection should be the last page(s) of your assignment. Respond to the following questions:

• What was your analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of your initial idea versus ChatGPT’s three outputs? Did you notice any bias in ChatGPT’s responses? 
• How did you decide which tourist experience to write about in your essay? In what ways did your final activity differ from your initial idea? Why did you make these changes?

Ensure your final document includes the following: 1) Your final tourist experience; 2) the screenshots/copies of ChatGPT’s responses; and 3) your reflection on the process. Then, upload this document to Canvas. 

Step 5: Group discussion during class time (approximately 15-20 minutes)

Take turns sharing the tourist experiences you created with your small groups, discussing the following items from your reflection:

• What did you choose as your final tourist experience? In what ways did your final experience differ from your initial idea? Why did you make these changes?
• When you evaluated ChatGPT’s responses, what strengths and weaknesses did you notice? Did you notice any bias? In what ways was the AI response beneficial and in what ways was it not? What can we learn from this evaluation?