The Department of Education has released the long-anticipated retooling of the Gainful Employment (GE) rule following work during the 2021-2022 Negotiated Rulemaking. Current law requires that certificate programs at all institutions as well as degree programs at private for-profit colleges must prepare students for “gainful employment” in a recognized occupation. The release of these proposed regulations will set performance standards on two measures for GE programs to maintain their Federal financial aid eligibility. In the current proposal, GE programs are asked to show that:
- Graduates can afford their yearly debt payments. In particular, the share of their annual earnings needed to devote to paying their debt (i.e., their “debt-to-earnings ratio”) must be equal to or less than 8 percent, or equal to or less than 20 percent of their discretionary earnings (i.e., their annual earnings above 150 percent of the Federal poverty guideline).
- At least half of graduates have higher earnings than a typical high school graduate in their State’s labor force who never pursued a postsecondary education.
Individual GE programs would be assessed separately on each of these two metrics. If a program fails at least one metric, the proposed regulations state they would need to warn students that the program is at risk of losing access to Federal aid. If a GE program fails the same metric twice in a three-year period, that program would lose access to Federal aid. The Department is estimating that currently, out of the 32,000 GE programs, that 1,800 would fail one of these metrics. While the eligibility for Title IV aid applies to the GE programs, the proposed rule states that the Department of Education will be calculating, and publishing its calculations for all Title IV programs, regardless of whether they are GE programs or not.
In addition to the GE proposed rule, the Department has also proposed changes to conduct robust monitoring and oversight of institutions of higher education, including on Financial Responsibility, Administrative Capability, Certification Procedures, and Ability to Benefit.
Of the more significant notes to the UPCEA community is a change to Certification Procedures where the Department has made changes to require: “Institutions show that their programs meet any required programmatic accreditation and State licensure requirements so that students can obtain employment. And institutions comply with all State consumer protection laws related to closure, recruitment, and misrepresentations for all States in which they enroll students.” The proposed language includes that the institution must satisfy these requirements for “where the student is located” and goes beyond just simply notifying students if they are aware if they meet, do not meet, or have not made a determination on meeting these licensure requirements in those states and notifying those students prior to taking the program.
While institutions may be involved in SARA, that arrangement covers a more narrow scope, and this prospective change by the Department implements broader applicability to consumer protection laws to institutions who are operating in those states, including areas including closure, recruitment and misrepresentation.
Comments on all of these proposals are due by June 20. If the final rule gets published before November 1 of this year, it could go into effect by July 1 of 2024. The impacts to UPCEA members of these proposals may be significant. UPCEA will continue to keep our membership updated of these developments, but we encourage you to bring this information to the attention of your institution’s government affairs office, compliance officers, and president’s office for additional scrutiny of gathering comments on the proposals.
- Department of Education Fact Sheet on Gainful Employment Regulations
- Department of Education Fact Sheet on Financial Responsibility, Administrative Capability, Certification Procedures, and Ability to Benefit Regulations
Click here for proposed language and to make a public comment.
The US Department of Education has created a No Cost Extension (NCE) Request Form on the coming deadline to use for Higher Education Emergency Relief Fund (HEERF) dollars, which supported institutions as COVID-19 relief grants. On June 30, 2023, the period for most HEERF grants will end and any remaining unliquidated grant funds will be returned to the Treasury Department. However, current law allows for grantees the option to receive up to a twelve-month No Cost Extension (NCE) of their grant project periods. The Department is requesting emergency approval to collect requests for an extension beyond June 30, 2023 and ensure that grant recipients have a plan for using their remaining HEERF grant funds. Please review this with your institutional leadership to make sure they are aware, and to request an extension if needed. The HEERF (both in amount and scope) is one of the largest in ED’s history, with 18,000 awards to over 5,100 institutions totaling over $76 billion. Read more.
Department Seeks Input on Prison Education Program Application – Deadline June 16
The Department of Education is greatly encouraging public comment addressing the following questions surrounding information collection as part of the Prison Education Program Application, as it ramps up the rolling out of Second Chance Pell for Prisoners programs to allow all institutions to take part:
- is this collection necessary for the plan to work properly;
- will the information be implemented in a well-timed process;
- are the time and effort put into this worth the money spent;
- how can the department improve its information collection techniques;
- And how can the department reduce the burden of this on their respondents.
It is important to note that all comments must be written and submitted by June 16th. The collection will provide insight into the necessary steps needed to be taken to implement this program. This program could largely impact the number of attendees in higher education programs, with Pell Grants allowing those who could not previously afford enrollment the chance to attend. This opportunity provides many with the chance to earn a quality education during their incarceration, and is an important opportunity for schools to review as the lead-up to the broader implementation of reinstatement of access to Pell Grants for incarcerated students begins on July 1, 2023. Read more and provide a comment by June 16.
Other News
- Momentum Building for Pell Grant Expansion (Inside Higher Ed)
- How Defaulting on the National Debt Could Affect Higher Education (American Council on Education)
Too many of us are making snap judgments about AI Chatbots based on reading one or two reviews, or by taking only five minutes to test out the current version.
Truth be told, vendors are rushing chatbots out to the market, many of them in beta version, in order to meet their competition and secure a place for a much better version that is still under development. As we watch the growing number and variety of apps using generative AI, we are seeing an increasing breadth and depth of products. Yet, I daresay that none of them are near the potential that they will reach in a couple of years of refinement. So, when we discuss hallucinations and out-of-date databases, we should be careful about reaching summative judgments. These products are still very much in development; there will be new innovations and there will be bigger and better pools of data that will stir the pot among ranking brands and products.
As Steven Levy writes in Wired:
Yet it’s folly to draw definitive conclusions based on these early versions of the technology, including the shotgun blast of AI updates announced by Google this week. Folks, this is an illusion. Today’s chatbots are taking baby steps in a journey that will rise to Olympic-level strides. Oren Etzioni, former CEO of nonprofit research lab the Allen Institute for AI, told me this week that they’re already getting better. One force driving that trend is the millions of users—including reporters trying to goad the systems into doing nutty things that make good copy—exposing areas in need of improvement. Computer scientists, whose specialty is optimizing, after all, have been hard at work addressing the flaws.
So, what are we to do, and when will we know which generative AI apps are the best? Only time will tell which are the best for our particular needs. But, in the meantime, we should begin building our prompt engineering skills. I try to do at least half a dozen queries in a day spread among several apps. In most cases, I try to prompt at least two different apps with the same or similar prompt just to make the comparison and get a sense of what I can expect from each app. Yes, even these early versions are very different from one another.
The ones that I am testing for my own use include some of the popular ones and some which you may not yet have discovered. My choices tend toward the “free” apps with the exception of the “Plus” level that was required in the beginning to access language model GPT-4 using ChatGPT. Know that I am not invested in any of the companies in this report. Here are half a dozen of those apps that I regularly use.
ChatGPT, of course, is the early leader offered by OpenAI. I subscribed to the PLUS version for $20 a month to get preferential access to the latest version.
Bing AI Chatbot is associated with ChatGPT. It uses OpenAI’s most advanced Language Model GPT-4. You can automatically access it through a Microsoft logon. This chatbot has full, up-to-date internet access and it can generate images as well as text.
Perplexity remains one of my most-used apps. It is very fast, up-to-date, automatically generates citations of sources, and suggests follow-up prompts.
Pi, which stands for personal intelligence, is created by Inflection AI, a small AI start-up based in Palo Alto, California. Pi is a personal AI, designed to be useful, friendly and fun. It has a strong ethical framework and is committed to providing accurate and comprehensive information. This app will speak to you, using any of the four expressive voices from which you may select. It learns your unique interests and needs and provides you with information that’s relevant to you. It seems more concerned about you, the user, than other chatbots. There is the suggestion that it may promote good mental health.
Google Bard is a rapidly-improving app. After a faltering start, recent updates make it one of the best chatbots out there. It is up-to-date. Three versions of responses to prompts are offered giving different views or approaches to the prompt. The responses are well integrated into the other google online apps. I like the tone and detail I get in response to the prompts I write.
ChatPDF is an app of a different sort. It opens a pdf that you supply and allows you to use the power of generative AI to assess, analyze and improve the document. This is particularly useful in evaluating reports, assignments and research paper submissions.
Each of these has different features, and each is continuing to develop. They will improve over time. While we often speak of such apps using the term “ChatGPT,” generically, there are actually many varieties of generative AI apps with more to come. Sabrina Ortiz of Wired writes:
ChatGPT is only one of the many increasingly popular chatbots. Our picks for the best AI chatbots and writers can lighten your workload by writing emails and essays. Although ChatGPT has made quite the buzz, its popularity has made it unreliable for everyday use since it’s often at capacity. The good thing is there are plenty of AI chatbots that are just as capable, and available whenever you need them. We put together a list of the best AI chatbots and AI writers on the market and detailed everything you need to know before choosing your next writing assistant.
We will see improvements and additions to the list of available generative AI apps on a daily basis in the coming months. Meanwhile, we should practice writing effective prompts for the different apps you are following. Best practices will vary from chatbot to chatbot, yet the beginning guidelines should include giving precise background and context; stating expressly what you are seeking; and unlike prior search apps, more in the prompt is better than less. Write your prompts as you would speak to a professional colleague. The key to success is to practice, practice, practice until you can be confident in your prompting approach for that particular app.
This article was originally published in Inside Higher Ed’s Transforming Teaching & Learning blog.
Twenty years ago nearly every online leader was familiar with faculty concerns about quality and cannibalization. Those concerns proved ill-founded, of course. Indeed, the online learning revolution continues unabated, driven by a virtuous circle of learning innovation and entrepreneurial approaches to expanding access. This transformative potential is why online learning continues to be a major focus for the UPCEA community, as discussed on this recent blog: The UPCEA Community: Advancing Online and Professional Education.
We now hear similar concerns about quality and cannibalization in the area of credential innovation (alternative, micro, or skill credentials). It’s not surprising. Alternative credentials are a new frontier that, like online learning a generation ago, has the potential to bring profound changes to the academy. UPCEA is well positioned to explore, catalyze, and lead on this new frontier. While alternative credentials are not new for UPCEA or for our members, there is now a heightened awareness of them among policymakers, foundations and employers, and increasingly, among institutions themselves, according to two recent benchmarking studies by UPCEA.
It’s worth recalling that many colleges and universities chose not to engage in online learning over the last decade or two. We know now that this was a strategic mistake. Once you are behind the curve, it’s hard to catch up. With alternative credentials, we believe it’s important to take a proactive approach. Wherever your institution finds itself in the developmental process, I strongly encourage you to be both intentional and strategic, with business models that are flexible, employer connections that drive learner success, and content that is both stackable and portable. For a quality framework at the enterprise level, I invite you to review UPCEA’s Hallmarks of Excellence in Credential Innovation for guidance.
If you have a stake in advancing the field of credentials or in developing your institution’s credentials strategy, I ask you to consider attending our new conference, Convergence: Credential Innovation in Higher Education.
Convergence: Credential Innovation in Higher Education – Washington, DC, November 1-3, 2023
To support our focus on credentials, UPCEA has partnered with AACRAO, the association for registrars, to present a new conference for the alternative credentials community: Convergence, in the first week of November. These two great associations and their members are vital to the future development and implementation of innovative credentials. Convergence reflects the confluence of factors leading to the evolution of this fast-moving, but still largely amorphous movement. This event will bring together key campus stakeholders in credential innovation—deans of professional education, chief online learning officers, registrars, enrollment management leaders and other stakeholders—to define and develop their institutional strategy with respect to alternative credentials. I hope to see you there.
Explore UPCEA’s Alternative & Non-Degree Credentials page, the new UPCEA Resources Guide (credentials section), the Council for Credential Innovation (CCI), the Alternative Credentials Network for UPCEA members, and the UPCEA online course, Credentials Beyond Degrees – the Role of Professional, Continuing, Online Educators in Credential Innovation, starting August 14, 2023.
Coming next month—The UPCEA Community: Building the Future
By Jim Fong
Last month, Inside HigherEd and Hanover Research released their survey of over 400 college and university presidents, and the results were confusing. The study showed that eight out of 10 presidents agree (and three of the eight strongly agree) that their institutions will be financially stable in the next decade.[1] However, the report acknowledges that higher education will be faced with significant challenges, including higher costs, possible consolidation, higher labor costs, faculty retention, diversity issues and the impact of inflation, among other factors. Presidents also appear to continue to question the quality of online courses versus face-to-face delivery or hybrid courses.
With presidents being optimistic, it is unclear as to what factors provide them with the confidence that their institutions will remain financially stable over the next 10 years. For starters, the demographic cliff, as coined by economist and Professor Nathan Grawe of Carleton College, is a major headwind for higher education, as it is anticipated that the number of 18-22 year-olds will be significantly lower over the next two decades. Some have estimated that there will be a shortfall of between 400,000 and 1,000,000 students annually. In fact, the National Student Clearinghouse has shown that the number of students attending college has declined by nearly three million over the past decade. While graduate enrollment has remained steady at roughly three million, undergraduate enrollment declined from 18.1 million in 2010 to 15.1 million in 2022.[2] This decrease occurred despite favorable or flat demographic trends for 18–22-year-olds and increasing high school graduation rates.
So, why are presidents optimistic? They are not sold on online education, despite more degrees and courses coming online. This is currently a post-pandemic observation that is not grounded in fact, but rather their impression, based on conversations from representatives from many institutions and reviews of program websites, that supply is increasing. We believe that the pandemic created a natural opportunity to move courses developed during the pandemic for existing students to compete for new students in the future. We believe that supply for online courses is increasing and has been doing so over the past decade.
With supply most likely increasing and demand decreasing, at least among 18-to-22 year-olds, how will financial stability improve? It can come from only a few places:
- Greater operational efficiency. Colleges and universities will need to improve operations. At UPCEA, we’ve been approached by a number of institutions to identify opportunities for strategic centralization to support online programs, improve processes and create more student-centricity.
- Maintaining or generating more enrollments from existing students. In retail economics, it is often difficult to generate significantly more purchases from an organization’s existing customer base without major shifts in strategy. Amazon over the course of two decades built its base over time going from the early days of textbooks online to moving content to Kindle, to selling music and then toys, to creating web hosting/server services and offering video streaming, and then creating storefronts and delivery services. Higher education has improved retention and thus improved some revenue streams. Online degrees have also created greater flexibility for existing students while attracting new ones. Beyond these major investments and the build out of brick-and-mortar facilities, institutions have not created enough in my opinion to command so much confidence from presidents.
- Attracting new students to existing products. Millennials have moved through our system, and our market, at least for the 18-to-22 year-old, is no longer growing. It can be argued that online education is really the same product, but offered through a different channel and thus attracts new students. The problem here is that supply has grown and unless our quality, our marketing, or the way we serve the student are clearly better, many institutions will be at a disadvantage, especially given that most have not even considered reducing prices.
- Creating new products for new or previously lost markets. Higher education has been resistant to this. College and university systems have been built around a degree model. UPCEA is partnering with the American Association of Collegiate Registrars and Admission Officers (AACRAO) to address system and process issues around challenges created by new educational models. It is likely, if we do nothing else and travel on the same trajectory, that undergraduate enrollments will decline further…even below 14 million enrollments. Creating new products such as microcredentials or unbundling the degree into certificates has the potential to reach other audiences, such as the 40.4 million designated as “Some College, No Credential.”[3] Potential students will be more likely to invest in higher education if they can earn credentials on their way to the 120-credit degree. The fear of not reaching 120-credits and even coming as close as a credit short and not receiving any official credential for knowledge attainment is likely to be a deterrent in the future. Another overlooked market is the 90 million+ adults in the U.S. who have a college degree. Microcredentials or graduate certificates could appeal to them and thus contribute to the financial stability that presidents espouse.
The money isn’t going to magically fall out of the sky with 18-to-22-year-olds returning to colleges and universities because their personal, professional or economic sabbaticals are over. Higher education will need to do something very dramatic to increase participation, confidence, and perceived return on investment (of both time and money). I was recently asked what the perfect college or university of the future might look like, and I said it could still offer bachelor’s or master’s degrees, as well as others, but what they will need is greater flexibility and stackability and the acknowledgement of learning along the way. I also said that grades might not be as important, and earning a competency or badge which could be applied to a degree later might matter more. I also said that when a potential student engages a college or university either through its website, in-person or on a call, they would be addressed on their terms, and that we design our communication and engagements around them and not us. We would also bring employers to the table, given the dramatically changing economy. Expert faculty only see one side of learning. Employers see the other and the two parties need to work more closely together to map out valued content. Both parties also need to be there working with accrediting agencies to define and assess quality of programs and professions. Not all programs will have the same levels of learning and quality, but neither will similar jobs within the same sector or industry.
Drastic times call for drastic measures and higher education is on the cusp. While I am not an economist and not factoring in inflation and tuition increases, I’ve estimated that with a three million enrollment decline, losing $30,000+ in tuition and fees equates to at least $90 billion no longer in the higher education sector. This further equates to an average of $22.5 million less to each institution, acknowledging that there are small and large schools and the impact would be relative to the size of the institution. Losing another 400,000 students could amount to another $12 billion shortfall or an average decline of $3 million for each school.
In addition to lost revenue, I fear that institutions could spiral downward due to further abandonment by potential students and that employers and the private sector will fill the void. While highly dystopian and not likely, the possibility does exist, especially given the rapid rate of change to an automated economy. It is my hope that higher education will create more flexible and stackable education in the form of online certificates and microcredentials that ultimately fits into a degree and I think we will. Much of what I’ve read tells me that despite presidents not being fully onboard in many cases, that the work in the trenches is happening. I want higher education to succeed. I want to be wrong. I want my friends, peers, co-workers, clients and friends to tell me that higher education pivoted and survived and is thriving. I so want to be wrong.
Supply in a post-pandemic world can continue to grow. Demand has to as well. We can reverse the effects of the demographic cliff by adding net new learners. In the past, success was defined by 15 to 18 million undergraduate and three million graduate learners. With a future demographic cliff number of 14 million undergraduates and three million graduates, we can add another six to eight million certificate seekers (operating a half the pace) to reverse the effects. We can scale the cliff and have demand exceed supply by creating more noncredit education and awarding badges. We need to do this if higher education is to thrive.
Jim Fong, UPCEA’s Chief Research Officer, has extensive background in marketing at Penn State, as well as experience in private industry. Jim brings a rich understanding of the dynamics driving today’s higher education leaders, providing research-driven strategy and positioning. Jim often presents at UPCEA conferences, sharing vital information with attendees.
[1] https://www.insidehighered.com/news/governance/executive-leadership/2023/04/11/hopeful-despite-headwinds-survey-presidents
[2] https://nscresearchcenter.org/current-term-enrollment-estimates/
[3] https://nscresearchcenter.org/some-college-no-credential/
UPCEA is proud to once again be offering UPCEA members the Bethaida “Bea” González Diversity in Leadership Scholars Program. Representative and diverse leadership is a cornerstone of UPCEA’s Commitment to Diversity and Inclusive Excellence.
The goal of the Diversity Scholars program is to equip diverse professionals at any stage of their career with the skills and knowledge needed to move into leadership positions on campus, in the field of professional, continuing, and online (PCO) education, and in UPCEA.
Applications for the 2023 cohort of Diversity in Leadership Scholars are being accepted through June 30, 2023. A selection committee will consider all applications and choose 5-7 individuals to each receive a full scholarship for the UPCEA PCO Professional Certificate or the PCO Leader Certificate* (both certificates consist of five courses).
Application Process:
Individuals who identify as a member of one or more diverse groups are encouraged to apply by submitting a curriculum vitae, a brief note of support (300 words or fewer) from a senior leader or supervisor at their institution, and a brief essay of no more than one page (single spaced) that addresses the following questions:
- How will completing this program help you achieve your career aspirations?
- How do you hope to contribute to your campus and the communities it serves?
- How do you hope to contribute to the PCO profession?
This program is only open to UPCEA members.
Application Deadline: Friday, July 14, 2023.
Recipients will be selected and notified by Friday, July 21, 2023.
Click here to submit your application.
If you have any questions or would like further information, please contact [email protected].
*The PCO Leader Certificate is appropriate for current higher ed leaders as well as professionals on the cusp of a significant leadership role.
Schroeder has been a leader in online learning since 1997
Ray Schroeder, UPCEA Senior Fellow and Professor Emeritus and former Associate Vice Chancellor for Online Learning at the University of Illinois Springfield, received an honorary doctorate of humane letters at the UIS commencement on May 13.
Schroeder has been engaged in online learning since 1997 and is widely recognized as one of the world’s leading experts in online education. He is founding director of UPCEA’s Center for Online Leadership, which led to the creation of the Summit for Online Leadership and other key strategic initiatives to advance the association’s role in online learning. Today, Ray is a sought-after speaker and thought leader, and curates multiple daily blogs, including the Professional, Continuing, and Online Education Update blog, in addition to his bi-weekly Online: Trending Now blog at Inside Higher Ed.
“Ray is extraordinary. He’s the most prescient thinker I know, in any field, always helping others understand a future that sometimes only he sees. He brings deep knowledge of and passion for advancing the field of online education—its potential to transform institutions struggling in the new economy, its role in expanding access for time- and distance-challenged students, and its capacity to revolutionize teaching and learning,” said Bob Hansen, CEO of UPCEA. “And there is nobody more generous with his time than Ray. With patience, kindness and wisdom, he has mentored hundreds of online teachers and administrators.”
Over the course of his career, Schroeder has received many awards and honors. He received the 2002-2003 Sloan Consortium (Sloan-C) Distinguished Scholar in Online Learning award, and was also individually honored with the 2002 Sloan-C Most Outstanding Achievement in Asynchronous Learning Networks. In 2010, Schroeder received the inaugural A. Frank Mayadas Leadership Award from Sloan-C, and joined 15 other national leaders as the Sloan-C Inaugural Fellows in the same year. Schroeder received the University of Illinois Alumni Association Distinguished Service Award in 2011. In 2016, Schroeder received the Mildred B. and Charles A. Wedemeyer Award for Outstanding Practitioner in Distance Education from the American Journal of Distance Education and the University of Wisconsin, Madison, as well as the United States Distance Teaching and Learning Association Hall of Fame Award.
With degrees in speech from Augustana College and radio and television from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Schroeder began his academic career at Urbana-Champaign as a part-time instructor of radio-TV in 1972. He became a full-time instructor in 1975, and was hired at Sangamon State University (now the University of Illinois Springfield) in 1977 as an assistant professor of communication. Continuing to teach full-time, Schroeder created the Sangamon State University Television Office in 1984.
In 1997, Schroeder took a leadership role in the emerging field of online learning, establishing the Office of Technology Enhanced Learning at the University of Illinois Springfield. The office’s efforts to assist in the delivery of online classes at the University of Illinois Springfield soon grew into support for entire degree programs.
In 2009, the University of Illinois Springfield’s Center for Online Learning, Research and Service (COLRS) was established through Schroeder’s efforts in collaboration with Provost Harry Berman. Along with the COLRS unit, in 2011 Schroeder launched the innovative eduMOOC, the largest online class at the time, with 2,700 students located in 70 countries worldwide. Schroeder served as Director of the Center for Online Learning, Research and Service from 1997 to 2013, and as Associate Vice Chancellor for Online Learning from 2013 to 2021.
UPCEA congratulates Ray on this extremely well-deserved honor!
The role of generative AI is rapidly evolving in education and in creating a vision of the society of the future.
Early in 2019, GPT-2 was announced by OpenAI, the non-profit, private company that now includes $11 billion in investments from Microsoft Corporation. Compared to what was to follow, the development was relatively quiet. Claudia Slowik and Filip Kaiser write in the Neoteric blog “On March 15, 2022, OpenAI released the new version of GPT-3 called ‘text-davinci-003.’ This model was described as more capable than previous versions of GPT. Moreover, it was trained on data up to June 2021, making it way more up-to-date than the previous versions of the models (trained on data up to Oct 2019).” It was with the 3.5 series of text and code completion versions that GPT took off. With the 4.0 version, released in November of 2022, an all-out scramble launched to create interfaces, apps and associated products to facilitate new and expanded access.
Google is one of the many firms engaged in efforts to catch up with the OpenAI release. After a flawed demo at the release of Google’s “Bard,” The Decoder reports that Google’s two large AI research centers, DeepMind and Google Brain AI, have pulled together to support the Gemini project, a large language model that will have a trillion parameters.
It was less than a month and a half ago, on March 30, 2023, that Auto-GPT was posted on GitHub by developer Significant Gravitas. As Wikipedia explains, “Auto-GPT is an ‘AI agent’ that given a goal in natural language, can attempt to achieve it by breaking it into sub-tasks and using the internet and other tools in an automatic loop. It uses OpenAI’s GPT-4 or GPT-3.5 APIs, and is among the first examples of an application using GPT-4 to perform autonomous tasks.”
With Auto-GPT, we have crossed the virtual Rubicon from the relatively simple-step activities of earlier GPT models to a process of sequencing independent steps to a complex feedback loop of multiple activities and assessments toward a defined outcome. Sabrina Ortiz writes in ZDNet “This means that Auto-GPT can perform a task with little human intervention, and can self-prompt. For example, you can tell Auto-GPT what you want the end goal to be and the application will self-produce every prompt necessary to complete the task.” Ortiz suggests “The application’s promising, autonomous abilities may make it our first glimpse of artificial general intelligence (AGI), a type of AI that can perform human-level intellectual tasks…. The Github demo shows sample goal prompts such as ‘Increase net worth, grow Twitter Account, Develop and manage multiple businesses.’ The application’s limitations listed on Github do warn that Auto-GPT’s output, ‘May not perform well in complex, real-world business scenarios.’ However, the results users have been sharing show that Auto-GPT can deliver some really impressive (and helpful) results.”
The development of generative AI has been so rapid that we have seen calls to pause development. Yet, these calls are more of alarm rather than any reasonable expectation that worldwide research on such a hot topic will be delayed in any way. Such a “pause” would be impossible to enforce, given the number and diverse locations of sites performing research in this field.
Led by developments in generative AI, we are on our way to AGI. It will not be a straightforward path, and there are numerous high hurdles to overcome, but we have passed an inflection point with the capabilities of Auto-GPT. Ben Lutkevich of Tech Target writes:
Artificial general intelligence (AGI) is the representation of generalized human cognitive abilities in software so that, faced with an unfamiliar task, the AGI system could find a solution. The intention of an AGI system is to perform any task that a human being is capable of…. AGI is considered to be strong artificial intelligence (AI). Strong AI contrasts with weak or narrow AI, which is the application of artificial intelligence to specific tasks or problems. IBM’s Watson supercomputer, expert systems and self-driving cars are examples of narrow artificial intelligence.
How long will it take to develop strong AI? No one knows for certain. Almost certainly, it will take years, but perhaps not the decades that had been previously predicted. We must remember just how quickly the current GPT and associated models have emerged.
What will widespread AGI mean? Again, no one knows for sure. What we do know is that many more human jobs will be performed by strong AI programs. The computers and AI programs will work tirelessly, efficiently and effectively. Of course, there will still be the need for many humans engaged in a myriad of tasks that are not best completed by AGI. We may see shorter work weeks for humans. New human-staffed careers may evolve to employ the displaced workers.
The implications for education are many. Will we still need the knowledge to perform tasks that are regularly completed by AI? Knowledge of how to direct and expand AI’s expertise in these areas will be essential. What human skills and abilities will be in most demand? Human values and ethics will be essential to guide programs if we are to coexist comfortably. AGI may be able to extend our knowledge and information in math and the sciences. Perhaps it will bring new insights and opportunities in the arts and humanities that have been in decline at universities in recent years.
With the advent of Auto-GPT, there is now a vision of a pathway for generative AI to take on increasingly multivariate tasks. Ever more complex objectives will be assigned to these more advanced AI apps. We must be vigilant to assure that human values and ethics guide the development in the coming months and years.
We also must carefully monitor the advent of AI in our career fields so that we are not caught unaware when there are reductions in the human workforce due to computer-generated efficiencies. This will require communication, collaboration and shared vision among researchers, corporations and educators. We will do well to recall the warning of Aldous Huxley nearly a century ago that the “Brave New World” may await those who exclusively value efficiency and technology over human emotion and individuality.
This article was originally published in Inside Higher Ed’s Transforming Teaching & Learning blog.
With the recent launch of ChatGPT, generative artificial intelligence entered the chat (pun intended) in a big way, and commentators immediately expressed concern about plagiarism and other forms of cheating in the classroom.
Since those early days, the conversation about how these new generative AI tools will disrupt classroom teaching and learning has broadened. Bigger questions have arisen, like how to ensure equity of access to the best tools, and how we’ll need to adjust our approach to workforce preparedness.
We asked a range of education thought leaders—from academics, to investors, to journalists, to association leaders, to human resource professionals—to share their perspectives on generative AI in the classroom. Their answers should impact how education marketers and vendors are designing, marketing and selling their products.
PREPARING STUDENTS TO SOLVE REAL-WORLD PROBLEMS
As educators prepare students for the careers of the future, they’ll need to be flexible, forward-thinking and fearless. Likewise, education products and curriculum will need to incorporate new ways to get the most out of human / bot interaction.
…
Ray Schroeder, Senior Fellow at the University Professional and Continuing Education Association (UPCEA) and Professor Emeritus at the University of Illinois Springfield (UIS):
“It is critically important that we in higher education embrace and fully engage in generative AI. Clearly, our students are entering a workforce in which they will be expected to work alongside these technologies. It is incumbent upon us to prepare those learners for that workforce environment as soon, and as completely, as possible. The careers of our graduates and the successful functioning of enterprises that employ them are at stake.”