Abstract:The release of ChatGPT to the public at the end of last year had many in the field of education worried. In response, this paper explored the future of college education and artificial intelligence (AI). First, a proper understanding of how large language models (LLMs) “train” and “learn,” along with their abilities and limitations, was established. Simply put, while LLMs produce plausible linguistic output, they are “stochastic parrots” that have no actual understanding of language. Next, we examined the dangers of generative AI and discovered that they might help in the creation and dissemination of misinformation. Even if these AI are not used with malicious intent, the fact that their training data sets are drawn from the internet—which reflects majority thinking—means that they can perpetuate and amplify social inequality and hegemonic stereotypes and biases. On the other hand, if we consider what is missing from the training data, it is only natural that marginalized voices should be even more marginalized. In addition, leaving the issue of the socially vulnerable aside, LLMs can only be trained on digital data, meaning analog data is ignored. This is in line with the idea of “the destruction of history” put forth by Joseph Weizenbaum, an early critic who warned of the dangers of artificial intelligence. We then discussed the relationship between humans and machines and considered which relationships were problematic and which were desirable. Researchers in the aviation industry recognized the problem of automation bias from an early date, but this phenomenon can be seen in other areas of society as well. Put simply, if a human places too much trust in a machine, they abdicate their decision-making responsibility to that machine and thus fail to respond quickly to solve any problems that may arise should that machine malfunction. LLMs do not endanger lives in the same way that airplanes do, but a similar bias can be seen with them as well. A more important issue, though, is the fact that people are no longer seen as whole human beings but as computers. This tendency was evident long before the advent of computers, for example in the attempts to quantify human intelligence through IQ tests, but it is a problem we must be particularly wary of in the age of AI. Lastly, we considered means for college education to find its way in the present situation. Educators in the US in particular, while dealing with ChatGPT, have pinpointed not the LLMs themselves but the “transactional nature” of education as the problem. That is, they argue that education has long since become less a process of learning and more a transaction in which students receive grades and degrees. Given this transactional environment, it is no wonder that student would rely too much on ChatGPT. This over-reliance, however, comes with side effects: not learning how to think properly, a lack of sufficient academic information, and learning an AI-based writing style. In response, US educators have proposed both “stick” (strategies that make it difficult for students to use LLMs) and “carrot” (strategies that encourage students to learn like human beings, not algorithms) solutions, but the heart of the matter seems to be a sense of responsibility. Creating an educational environment in which students can develop a sense of responsibility for themselves is the path forward for education in the age of AI. If we do this, LLMs can become a useful tool rather than an enemy to fear.

Large Language Model-Based Chatbots in Education: Student Perspectives on AI-Generated Text Quality and Credibility in Wuhan’s Private Universities

The Influence of GenAI on the Effectiveness of Argumentative Writing in Higher Education: Evidence from a Quasi-Experimental Study in China

AI Chatbots in Chinese higher education: adoption, perception, and influence among graduate students—an integrated analysis utilizing UTAUT and ECM models

Embracing AI in Education: Understanding the Surge in Large Language Model Use by Secondary Students

Last Week with ChatGPT: A Weibo Study on Social Perspective Regarding ChatGPT for Education and Beyond

How Should College Education Respond to Large Language Models?

Exploring the impact of generative AI-based technologies on learning performance through self-efficacy, fairness & ethics, creativity, and trust in higher education

Understanding learners' perceptions of ChatGPT: A thematic analysis of peer interviews among undergraduates and postgraduates in China

The Future of Learning: Large Language Models through the Lens of Students

Generative Conversational AI And Academic Integrity: A Mixed Method Investigation To Understand The Ethical Use of LLM Chatbots In Higher Education

Emerging tensions around learning with LLM-based chatbots

From ChatGPT to China’ Sci-Tech: Implications for Chinese Higher Education

Large Language Model‐Based Chatbots in Higher Education

Towards Applying Powerful Large AI Models in Classroom Teaching: Opportunities, Challenges and Prospects

Experiences from Integrating Large Language Model Chatbots into the Classroom

Opportunities and Challenges of Generative Artificial Intelligence in Facilitating Learning for Chinese University Students

EduChat: A Large-Scale Language Model-based Chatbot System for Intelligent Education

What is the role of ChatGPT and other large language model AI in Higher Education?

An LLM-Driven Chatbot in Higher Education for Databases and Information Systems

Impact of Assignment Completion Assisted by Large Language Model-based Chatbot on Middle School Students’ Learning

Future of education in the era of generative artificial intelligence: Consensus among Chinese scholars on applications of ChatGPT in schools