Monitoring Desk
ISLAMABAD/ MINNESOTA: ChatGPT has passed a prestigious graduate-level exam conducted by the University of Minnesota, although not with the best grades.
According to professors at the schools, the powerful new AI chatbot tool recently passed law exams in four courses at the University of Minnesota and another exam at the University of Pennsylvania at the Wharton School of Business.
The University of Minnesota Law School’s professors recently graded the examinations blindly to see how well ChatGPT could generate answers on examination for the four courses. The bot performed at the level of a C+ student on average after completing 95 multiple-choice questions and 12 essay questions, achieving a low but passing mark in all four courses.
ChatGPT in business management
ChatGPT performed better on a business management course exam at Wharton, earning a B to B- grade. The Wharton School’s professor Christian Terwiesch, wrote about the results in a paper. He claimed that ChatGPT performed “amazing” when answering questions about operations management and process analysis but struggled with more advanced prompts and made “surprising mistakes” with basic math.
The test results come as an increasing number of schools and teachers voice concerns about ChatGPT’s immediate influence on students’ ability to cheat on assignments. Even though it needs to be clarified how frequently students use ChatGPT and how detrimental it could be to their academic performance, some educators are moving quickly to evaluate their assignments in response.
ChatGPT has been used to generate creative essays, novels, and song lyrics in response to user queries since its release in late November. It has created study abstracts that have fooled some scientists. Even some Chief Excutive Officers (CEOs) have used it to compose emails or do accounting tasks.
ChatGPT is trained on vast amounts of web data to generate responses to user queries. Although it has gained popularity among users, it has also sparked specific concerns, including those regarding errors and the possibility that it could reinforce biases and spread false information.
According to Jon Choi, a law professor at the University of Minnesota, the purpose of the examinations was to investigate ChatGPT’s potential to assist lawyers in their practice and to assist students in exams, whether or not their professors permit it because the questions often mimic the writing lawyers do in real life.
Choi claimed that “ChatGPT struggled with the most classic components of law school exams, such as spotting potential legal issues and deep analysis applying legal rules to the facts of a case, but ChatGPT may be highly effective at producing a first version that a student could then edit.
He believes that human-AI collaboration is the most exciting use of ChatGPT and related technology.
He asserted that his strong suspicion is that AI assistants will soon be common and accepted tools for lawyers, and law schools should help students prepare for that possibility. Of course, suppose professors of the law want to continue to assess students’ ability to recall constitutional concepts and doctrines. In that case, they’ll need to implement restrictions like banning internet use during exams to enforce that.
Similarly, Wharton’s Terwiesch discovered that the chatbot was “remarkably good” at adjusting its replies in response to human signals, such as revising answers after pointing out an error, implying the possibility for humans and AI to collaborate.
However, there is still immediate uncertainty around whether and how students should use ChatGPT. For instance, ChatGPT use on district networks and devices has already been prohibited in Seattle and New York City public schools.
Given that ChatGPT performed above average on his exam, Terwiesch said that he agrees that students should be restricted while taking examinations. He stated that bans are necessary because when you give a medical doctor a degree, you want them to know medicine, not how to utilize a bot. The same applies to other skill certifications, such as business and law.
Terwiesch, on the other hand, feels that this technology will eventually find a home in the classroom. He claimed that “we would have wasted the incredible chance provided by ChatGPT if all we had had the same educational system as before.”
