What is ChatGPT? AI technology sends schools scrambling to preserve learning

Published

3 years ago

January 18, 2023

admin

Not even two months after its creation, a new artificial intelligence (AI) technology called ChatGPT is getting banned from schools and stirring controversy among educators.

ChatGPT, a free and easy-to-use AI search tool, hit the ground running when it was launched to the public in November. A user types in a question and ChatGPT spits back out an easily understandable answer in an essay format.

Although a huge advancement in the technology field, educators and school systems must grapple with the new tool and the challenges it introduces.

“While the tool may be able to provide quick and easy answers to questions, it does not build critical-thinking and problem-solving skills, which are essential for academic and lifelong success,” Jenna Lyle, a spokesperson for New York City’s Department of Education, said.

New York City and Seattle public schools have banned the use of ChatGPT from their devices and networks, citing concerns about cheating and a negative impact on learning. How ChatGPT became popular so quickly

Adam Conner, vice president for technology Policy at the Center for American Progress, said ChatGPT became so popular quickly because it is one of the first AI technologies of its kind to be available to the public in a way the public can understand it.

“What is different about GPT is that it is generative, that it creates the kind of outputs in ways that normal human beings understand as opposed to [the technology] just kind of outputting code or data” that only a subset of the population understands, Conner said.

Unlike other search engines, such as Google, ChatGPT can be conversational, giving human-like responses and dialogue with a user. A user can ask ChatGPT to create a resignation letter, discussion prompts for classes and even tests for students.

Jim Chilton, CTO of Cengage Group, an education technology company, says ChatGPT can be thought of as a “virtual best friend.”

“I did this with a calculus example, ‘generate me a calculus final exam.’ Not only did it generate it, but it also was able to answer each of the problems that it gave me. It explained step by step how it solved the calculus problem, reminding me of the principles as you went through to solve the problem.” Cheating and learning concerns

What makes ChatGPT a challenge for educators is the AI technology comes up with unique wording for answers to the same question.

For example, when asking ChatGPT “What is an apple?”, one response begins, “An apple is a fruit that grows on a tree in the rose family, and is typically round and red, green, or yellow in color.” When asked the same question again, ChatGPT starts, “An apple is a pomaceous fruit, meaning it is produced by a deciduous tree in the rose family, cultivars of the species Malus domestica.”

These varying answers, which may all be correct, make it supremely difficult for an educator to discern whether a student used ChatGPT to write an assigned essay.

In a statement given to The Hill, an OpenAI spokesperson said the company is already working with educators to address their concerns about ChatGPT.

“We don’t want ChatGPT to be used for misleading purposes in schools or anywhere else, so we’re already developing mitigations to help anyone identify text generated by that system. We look forward to working with educators on useful solutions, and other ways to help teachers and students benefit from artificial intelligence,” the spokesperson said.

While technologies continue to be created to catch plagiarism or cheating with AI, an arguably bigger concern is students using ChatGPT and not learning the material.

“It’s worrying that they’re not learning the research skills, the critical thinking skills. I think this would be the highest concern. The reason why we have them write these papers isn’t for them to write papers. It’s to really build those skills around thinking,” Sean Glantz, a regional chapter support coordinator for the Computer Science Teachers Association (CSTA), said of students. ChatGPT isn’t always right

ChatGPT is a machine learning model, meaning it improves with increased interaction with users on the platform.

ChatGPT evolves with human interactions, with its creators saying this “dialogue format makes it possible for ChatGPT to answer followup questions, admit its mistakes, challenge incorrect premises and reject inappropriate requests.”

As it learns, it can produce incorrect information. While a concern in some ways, this can actually be a benefit to teachers.

Glantz, who is also a high school computer science teacher in California, says the incorrect information ChatGPT gives may help teach students to fact-check statements and learn more about the technology they are using.

“When this thing gives us an incredibly convincing answer, and it’s totally wrong, well, ‘How did it arrive at that?’ That provides an opportunity to get into a discussion around what is the language learning model? What is artificial intelligence, right? What is machine learning?” Glantz said.

Because ChatGPT is a language learning model, the errors are also a sign that the technology is working as it should.

It is “validation of the technology and its current maturity state, and I think we will get you to see it get smarter over time, particularly as it learns and gets more material, more information, more facts for you to build its intelligence upon,” Chilton said. Are the schools’ bans useful?

While some believe there is merit in a ban perhaps temporarily due to rapid use of ChatGPT among students, experts and teachers say the bans do not seem useful or equitable in the long term.

Although Conner said he does believe the bans on ChatGPT have “sort of a purpose,” he said, “everybody knows it’s not a universal solution.”

One major issue with the bans, Glantz said, is “equity and access.”

When a school bans ChatGPT, they can only enforce it on school computers and WiFi. While this works for students who don’t have access to technology outside of school, many students have personal devices at home they can use to access the AI technology.

“The students that are most impacted when a piece of software like ChatGPT is banned on school computers and school WiFi, that affects the kids that only have access to technology when they’re at school, using school technology,” Glantz said.

Glantz said he has seen some students go as far as to use a WiFi hotspot in school to get around the ban. Defense & National Security — Top US, Ukrainian military officials meet Energy & Environment — Disasters displaced 3 million Americans last year

Teaching students how to use ChatGPT is also important because this type of technology could be important for jobs in the future, so “making sure that we’re giving the students those skill sets to leverage technology is going to be really important,” Glantz said.

Maneuvering around or with ChatGPT may be the beginning of figuring out the relationship between schools and AI technology.

“The decisions going forward with how to address ChatGPT and AI in schools will have to be a responsibility that falls on the company, educators, parents and administrators,” according to Conner.

Sports

NASCAR: Lawsuit about forcing permanent charter

Published

1 hour ago

August 19, 2025

admin

NASCAR: Lawsuit about forcing permanent charter

Associated Press

Aug 19, 2025, 03:38 PM ET

CHARLOTTE, N.C. — NASCAR argued in its latest court filing that Michael Jordan is suing the stock car series to earn a permanent charter that no other teams possess, and that neither 23XI Racing nor Front Row Motorsports has suffered any harm by racing as “open” entries.

NASCAR also indicated in its 34-page response filed late Monday that it has buyers interested in the six charters that have been set aside as a federal judge decides if the two teams can have them back for the remaining 11 races of this season. NASCAR is prepared to immediately begin the process of allocating the charters elsewhere.

These latest arguments are part of the ongoing federal antitrust lawsuit filed by 23XI and Front Row against NASCAR in a fight over charters, which are essentially franchise tags. 23XI, owned by retired basketball Hall of Famer Michael Jordan and three-time Daytona 500 winner Denny Hamlin, and Front Row, owned by entrepreneur Bob Jenkins, were the only two organizations out of 15 not to sign extensions on new charter agreements.

All the teams were fighting to have the charters made permanent during more than two years of extension negotiations, but NASCAR refused and its final offer was through 2031. 23XI and Front Row won a temporary injunction to be recognized as chartered as the case heads toward a Dec. 1 trial date.

The injunction was eventually overturned, appealed by the teams, and U.S. District Judge Kenneth Bell will hear arguments Aug. 28 on the matter. 23XI and Front Row as “open” teams do not receive the same financial percentages as chartered teams.

A rulebook change in July after the chartered status was stripped from the two organizations ensured that the six cars aren’t in danger of not qualifying for a race; starting spots are guaranteed to the 36 chartered cars in every 40-car field.

“Mr. Jordan has said he wants to use the litigation to grant him a permanent Charter that no other team has,” NASCAR alleged.

23XI and Front Row have maintained they will continue to race even if they must do so as open teams. NASCAR has argued that when the two organizations did not sign the extensions they lost all rights to charters and the sanctioning body should be free to move them.

“Plaintiffs’ theoretical inability to obtain Charters post-trial also does not justify NASCAR from selling or transferring Charters, because Plaintiffs do not have Charters now because of their own strategic choice,” NASCAR said in its filing. “Plaintiffs had multiple opportunities to acquire 2025 Charters, and they squandered them.”

NASCAR also argued that a court cannot order the private company into a partnership with teams it is not interested in doing business with. Another argument by NASCAR is that 23XI and Front Row have not been harmed by not being chartered because their drivers have not left the team and the rule change protects them from missing races; Tyler Reddick of 23XI has clauses in his contract that he can leave if his car is not chartered.

Additionally, NASCAR said it pays teams a higher percentage than even Formula 1 does and that its payout structure to teams proves it is not a monopoly because it was increased first by 28% in the 2016 charter agreement, and then by 62% in the 2025 agreement.

“NASCAR pays Teams more than even Formula 1 as a percentage of profit,” NASCAR said. “Plaintiffs ignore the pay raises the Teams received. Instead, they focus on a text during negotiations for the 2025 Charter that said an internal version of the May 2024 draft contained ‘zero wins’ for Teams.

“Plaintiffs ignore that the actual May 2024 draft proposed to Teams carried forward the biggest win for the Teams — a massive pay increase — that was set out in the December 2023 draft. It also gave Charter holders an opportunity to obtain any improved extension terms NASCAR offered to third parties and increased Teams’ ability to receive investor funding, among other benefits.”

World

Ukrainian diplomat involved in 90s nuclear deal with Russia warns Trump about ‘very big mistake’ with Putin

Published

1 hour ago

August 19, 2025

admin

Ukrainian diplomat involved in 90s nuclear deal with Russia warns Trump about 'very big mistake' with Putin

Ukrainians have given a lukewarm reaction to this week’s White House summit.

There is bafflement and unease here after US President Donald Trump switched sides to support his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin, dropping calls for a ceasefire and proposing that Ukraine surrender territory.

While allies are talking up the prospects of progress, people here remain unconvinced.

Ukraine war latest – Trump rules out using US troops

The Trump administration’s contradictory statements on possible security guarantees are causing concern here.

MP Lesia Vasylenko told Sky News it is not at all clear what the allies have in mind.

“Who is going to be there backing Ukraine in case Russia decides to revisit their imperialistic plans and strategies and in case they want to restart this war of aggression?”

For many Ukrainians, there is a troubling sense of deja vu.

In the 1994 Budapest Memorandum, Ukraine agreed to give up not land but its nuclear arsenal, inherited from the Soviet Union, in return for security assurances from Russia and other powers.

They know how that ended up to their enormous cost. Putin reneged on Russia’s side of the bargain, with his invasion of Crimea in 2014 and once again with his full-scale attack three and a half years ago.

We met veteran Ukrainian diplomat Yuri Kostenko, who helped lead those negotiations in the 90s.

He said there is a danger the world makes the same mistake and trusts Vladimir Putin when he says he wants to stop the killing, something Mr Trump said he now believes.

👉 Listen to Sky News Daily on your podcast app 👈        

“It’s not true, it’s not true, Russia never, never, it’s my practices in more than 30 years, Russia never stop their aggression plans to occupy all Ukraine and I think that Mr Trump, if he really believes Mr Putin, it will be a very big mistake, Mr Trump, a very big mistake.”

Before the Alaska summit, allies agreed the best path to peace was forcing Mr Putin to stop his invasion, hitting him where it hurts with severe sanctions on his oil trade.

But Mr Trump has given up calls for a ceasefire and withdrawn threats to impose those tougher sanctions.

Instead, he has led allies down a different and more uncertain path.

Ukrainians we met on the streets of Kyiv said they would love to believe in progress more than anything, but are not encouraged by what they are hearing.

While the diplomacy moves on in an unclear direction, events on the ground and in the skies above Ukraine are depressingly predictable.

Russia is continuing hundreds of drone attacks every night, and its forces are advancing on the front.

If Vladimir Putin really wants this war to end, he’s showing no sign of it, while Ukrainians fear Donald Trump is taking allies down a blind alley of fruitless diplomacy.

US

Ukrainian diplomat involved in 90s nuclear deal with Russia warns Trump about ‘very big mistake’ with Putin

Published

1 hour ago

August 19, 2025

admin

Ukrainians have given a lukewarm reaction to this week’s White House summit.

While allies are talking up the prospects of progress, people here remain unconvinced.

Ukraine war latest – Trump rules out using US troops

The Trump administration’s contradictory statements on possible security guarantees are causing concern here.

MP Lesia Vasylenko told Sky News it is not at all clear what the allies have in mind.

“Who is going to be there backing Ukraine in case Russia decides to revisit their imperialistic plans and strategies and in case they want to restart this war of aggression?”

For many Ukrainians, there is a troubling sense of deja vu.

In the 1994 Budapest Memorandum, Ukraine agreed to give up not land but its nuclear arsenal, inherited from the Soviet Union, in return for security assurances from Russia and other powers.

We met veteran Ukrainian diplomat Yuri Kostenko, who helped lead those negotiations in the 90s.

He said there is a danger the world makes the same mistake and trusts Vladimir Putin when he says he wants to stop the killing, something Mr Trump said he now believes.

👉 Listen to Sky News Daily on your podcast app 👈        

Before the Alaska summit, allies agreed the best path to peace was forcing Mr Putin to stop his invasion, hitting him where it hurts with severe sanctions on his oil trade.

But Mr Trump has given up calls for a ceasefire and withdrawn threats to impose those tougher sanctions.

Instead, he has led allies down a different and more uncertain path.

Ukrainians we met on the streets of Kyiv said they would love to believe in progress more than anything, but are not encouraged by what they are hearing.

While the diplomacy moves on in an unclear direction, events on the ground and in the skies above Ukraine are depressingly predictable.

Russia is continuing hundreds of drone attacks every night, and its forces are advancing on the front.

If Vladimir Putin really wants this war to end, he’s showing no sign of it, while Ukrainians fear Donald Trump is taking allies down a blind alley of fruitless diplomacy.