ChatGPT ghostwriting essay? Don't use artificial intelligence as a cheating helper

The ChatGPT wave has spread to the education sector. According to media reports, college students are increasingly using ChatGPT to assist them in completing their coursework and papers. Some literature students say they can have ChatGPT generate papers "more and more like their own" by building their own corpus, while other science students directly use the tool to complete their programming assignments. Moreover, ChatGPT's powerful ghostwriting ability has directly impacted the traditional gray industry chain of human ghostwriting, and even the price of dissertation ghostwriting has been reduced.

Objectively speaking, some students use ChatGPT to do their assignments just for the sake of novelty; after all, young people have always been at the forefront of using new technologies. To free up time for completing the core content of the assignment, it is not a bad idea to use ChatGPT to check the literature and smooth out the framework. Worryingly, students are already leaving assignments entirely to artificial intelligence. What is the difference between building a corpus to generate a paper and entering a command to get an assignment and taking someone else's homework? Such intelligent assistants are clearly cheating helpers. The practice of letting others do the knowledge production for you is already bad. By replacing human ghostwriters with ChatGPT and simplifying the process to lower the price, are they not contributing to the wind of cheating?

Writing assignments is not about writing for the sake of writing, and writing essays is not about thesis. The fundamental purpose of getting students to complete their homework is to help them develop creative problem-solving skills. From gathering information to writing an essay and revising it for perfection, each step requires students to use their hands and brains before they can gain anything; this process also helps students to improve their critical skills, develop academic literacy, and form academic norms. If an AI is trained to resemble one's own language style and turns in an assignment that is hard to distinguish from the real thing, not only will it be difficult for the teacher to keep track of the student's learning, but the student himself will have nothing to gain. Letting AI write assignments may seem to save a moment's effort, but it wastes a long time's effort. If such a culture spreads in the basic stage of academic research, it will undoubtedly be a kind of damage to the academic ecology and academic spirit.

In view of the potential for AI cheating, some universities in China and abroad have issued regulations prohibiting or restricting the use of ChatGPT, and some journals and publishers have also put forward corresponding requirements for the use of AI writing tools. These measures can help limit cheating with AI, but the key to eliminating it is for users to actively refuse to be "alienated" by the tool. As some professionals say, "ChatGPT itself has no integrity; only the people who use it have integrity issues." Whether students or scholars, they should understand that academic research cannot be adulterated, and only their own completed works can be considered valuable.

Artificial intelligence technology cannot be allowed to become a cheating helper, but it can be responded to with an open mind. The limited nature of artificial intelligence dictates that it cannot exist in place of people, and as an aid, its development may well bring more convenience and innovation to education and teaching. Some teachers have already realized that if students are good at using ChatGPT, it will help to improve the overall ability of learning, improve the quality of assignments, and urge professors to reflect on their teaching methods and contents. At a time when information technology is constantly evolving, learning to use new technologies to add to education may be a necessary course of study.