Resolution Draft from IP Caucus Meeting Today

[Clancy Ratliff]

Hi everyone,

We have finished a draft of a resolution on generative language models (incl. ChatGPT)! I will be taking this to the Resolutions Committee meeting tomorrow. Any of you who are here are welcome to join me!

------

Whereas generative language models, such as ChatGPT, have prompted concern about the ethics of writing practices on campuses,

Whereas the history of writing is one of adaptation to different and changing tools and technologies,

Whereas as educators we should teach not punish,

Whereas as educators we should design assignments that help students integrate the latest technology into their academic and professional lives,

Be it resolved that we should

• find ways to use generative language models to achieve course objectives,
• rethink our course objectives in light of these new models,
• avoid taking punitive measures that do not take into account students’ evolving understanding of the role of generative language models,
• work with students to help them understand how to use generative language models ethically in different contexts, and
• work with educational institutions to develop guidelines for using generative language models ethically.

-------


Clancy Ratliff, Ph.D.
Professor
Assistant Department Head
Department of English
University of Louisiana at Lafayette
http://culturecat.net/portfolio/

[Clancy Ratliff]

OK, you all remember that I talked about going through the Resolutions Committee process in 2013 for our resolution about plagiarism detection services. Well...my brain entirely deleted part of that process! Drafts of resolutions have to be sent to the committee prior to the conference. BUT, we can do a Sense of the House motion about generative language models. It just has to be a lot shorter than a resolution.

I found out too that CCCC and MLA are forming a joint task force about ChatGPT/AI writing, and I am going to send our resolution to them tonight. They will almost certainly be publishing a formal position statement, and maybe our ideas will make it into that. So I still think our time drafting this today was very well spent, for what it's worth. If any of you have suggestions for what we could cut from this draft for the Sense of the House motion, or what you definitely want to keep from this draft for the Sense of the House motion, let me know.

Clancy Ratliff, Ph.D.
Professor
Assistant Department Head
Department of English
University of Louisiana at Lafayette
http://culturecat.net/portfolio/

[Karen Lunsford]

Hi Clancy,   Just a note to say thank you for organizing all of this!   Best, Karen

--

---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Intellectual Property Caucus" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to intellectual-propert...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/intellectual-property-caucus/CAPBEbZx%2B5NAZWfgteeFvJrpGV%3DD-zGX%3D7KECm_rxLn4UF4cbyg%40mail.gmail.com.

--

Karen Lunsford, PhD

Associate Professor of Writing

Director, Writing Program

3432 South Hall

University of California, Santa Barbara 93106-3010

klun...@writing.ucsb.edu

Pronouns: she, her, hers