AI-led blogging: An experiment with GTP4, DALL-E & Grammarly

This is a long post – so bare with me. It goes into detail, step-by-step as to how I produced an entire blog with the use of four AI tools. You’ll find all the prompts and responses contained below:

---

Using AI to generate a blog post from scratch

The idea sparked during a conversation with GTP4

It started with an uncomplicated prompt. I’m working on a PowerPoint for a workshop I am giving next week. I’m pretty much done but was interested in how GTP4 would approach this. I prompted:

I’m a lecturer in Education Studies, trying to persuade my foundation year students that data is important. Can you give me some examples of application

Prompt

GTP4 happily replied:

Certainly! Emphasizing the importance of data in Education Studies can help students understand its significance in shaping the educational landscape. Here are some examples of data application in education that you can use to persuade your foundation year students:

1. Personalized Learning: Data helps in analyzing individual student performance, learning styles, and preferences. Teachers can use this information to create personalized learning plans, which can lead to improved academic outcomes.
2. Early Intervention: Data can help identify students who may be struggling or at risk of falling behind. Teachers and support staff can then intervene early, providing targeted assistance to help students overcome challenges and stay on track.
3. Evaluating Teaching Methods: Data can be used to evaluate the effectiveness of various teaching methods, instructional strategies, and classroom management techniques. This enables continuous improvement and evidence-based decision-making in education.
4. Resource Allocation: Data-driven insights can help administrators make informed decisions about resource allocation, ensuring that schools and districts receive the necessary support to meet the needs of their students.
5. Policy Development: Data can inform the creation and evaluation of educational policies at the local, regional, and national levels. By understanding trends and patterns, policymakers can make better decisions that positively impact the educational system.
6. Predictive Analytics: Data can be used to forecast student performance, dropout rates, and other important educational outcomes. This allows educators and administrators to make proactive decisions and implement targeted interventions to improve overall student success.
7. Professional Development: Data can be used to identify areas where teachers need additional training or support. This helps create targeted professional development programs that can enhance teaching quality and positively impact student learning.
8. Parental Engagement: Data can help facilitate communication between parents and educators. By sharing information on student progress and performance, parents can better understand their child’s needs and support their learning at home.
9. Benchmarking: Data allows schools and districts to compare their performance against other institutions and national standards. This can lead to the identification of best practices and the development of strategies for improvement.
10. Research: Data in education serves as a valuable resource for researchers, helping them investigate learning processes, teaching strategies, and other factors that contribute to student success. This research can then inform future educational practices and policies.

GTP4

---

Digging into the initial reply with further prompts

You know how I feel about learning styles. I kind of ignored the whole reply, my mind was on one thing – the reference to learning styles in bullet point 1. My reply was swift

Are learning styles real?

Prompt

…and the reply:

The concept of learning styles has been a popular topic in education for decades, with various models suggesting that individuals have different preferences for how they process and absorb information. Some of the most well-known models include Visual, Auditory, and Kinesthetic (VAK) learning styles, as well as others like Kolb’s Experiential Learning Theory and Howard Gardner’s Theory of Multiple Intelligences.

However, the validity of learning styles as a concept has been widely debated and questioned among researchers and educators. Numerous studies have attempted to validate the existence of learning styles, but the evidence supporting their effectiveness is weak, and some even suggest that the concept is a myth. Critics argue that the idea of learning styles may oversimplify the complex process of learning and lead to ineffective teaching methods.

Instead, contemporary research points to the importance of evidence-based teaching practices that are adaptable and focus on the diverse needs of learners. This includes employing a variety of teaching methods, engaging multiple senses, and addressing different skill levels, rather than focusing solely on learning styles. In this way, educators can create a more inclusive and effective learning environment that benefits all students, regardless of their individual preferences.

GTP4

---

I couldn’t help but investigate that first reply further. My prompt:

If we should be critical of learning styles, why did you imply they are legitimate in your first reply to me?

Prompt

and the reply:

You are correct, and I apologize for any confusion my initial response may have caused. In retrospect, I should have been more clear and accurate in my presentation of personalized learning. My intention was to emphasize the importance of data in tailoring instruction to meet the diverse needs of students, rather than reinforcing the concept of learning styles.

Personalized learning is about adapting the teaching process to accommodate individual differences in students’ abilities, prior knowledge, and interests, among other factors. This approach focuses on customizing educational experiences based on data-driven insights, rather than relying on predetermined learning styles. It is important to acknowledge the complexity of learning and consider multiple factors, including students’ cognitive, emotional, and social needs, when designing personalized learning experiences.

Again, I apologize for any confusion and appreciate you pointing out the inconsistency in my response. Please let me know if you have any other questions or concerns.

GTP4

---

Test driving GTP4: How is it at academic writing?

Right… I was curious to explore learning styles further and test what GTP4 could really do. I was going to get it to do some writing for me! I prompted:

Can you write an argument advocating against the propagation of learning styles? They are ultimately harmful to learners – so make your argument strong and targeted to a specialist audience.

Prompt

The initial reply produced an interesting article with a title and seven headings. The body text also had two in-text citations – but not a reference list, so I asked for that:

Can you write the reference list for this article?

Prompt

This is a BIG moment. My previous experiment with ChatGTP led to a load of references that were completely made up. You can read more about that here: Can a blog post written by an AI trick an AI? As such, my first task was to check the references it produced and both were correct. Real sources, linked to the writing. But, I didn’t stop there…

As part of the response from GTP4, it offered the following:

Please note that these references are formatted in APA style. If you require a different citation style, please let me know, and I can adjust the references accordingly. Additionally, if you would like to include more sources in your reference list, I can suggest other relevant studies or articles on this topic.

GTP4

So I asked:

Yes – please rewrite this with more references and include the reference list in APA 7th.

Prompt

It run out of tokens in the reply, so I further prompted:

Can you complete the reference list please?

Prompt

and it dutifully responded.

---

The final GTP4 result

So the combination of all my prompts led to the following text:

Title: Debunking the Learning Styles Myth: A Call for Evidence-Based Educational Practices

Introduction

The concept of learning styles has enjoyed widespread popularity in education for decades, despite a lack of empirical evidence supporting its efficacy. This paper aims to challenge the legitimacy of learning styles and provide a compelling argument for why educators and researchers should be critical of their propagation. We contend that the perpetuation of learning styles is ultimately harmful to learners and that the education community should embrace evidence-based practices instead.

1. Lack of Empirical Evidence

A cornerstone of any effective educational theory is a robust body of empirical evidence. However, numerous studies have failed to provide conclusive support for the existence of learning styles or their impact on learning outcomes (Coffield et al., 2004; Pashler et al., 2008; Willingham et al., 2015). Meta-analyses have revealed a consistent lack of empirical evidence to validate learning styles (Coffield et al., 2004; Pashler et al., 2008), indicating that the concept is built on shaky foundations.

2. Oversimplification of Learning

The idea of learning styles oversimplifies the complex and multifaceted process of learning (Geake, 2008; Hattie, 2009). Learning is not solely determined by individual preferences but is influenced by a myriad of factors, including prior knowledge, cognitive abilities, motivation, and socio-cultural context. By reducing learning to a set of static styles, educators may inadvertently neglect these crucial aspects of the learning process, hindering their ability to cater to students’ diverse needs (Dunn & Griggs, 2000).

3. Perpetuation of Stereotypes

The propagation of learning styles may lead to the reinforcement of stereotypes and an overly deterministic view of learners (Scott, 2010). By labeling students as “visual,” “auditory,” or “kinesthetic” learners, educators may inadvertently constrain students to a particular mode of learning, limiting their potential for growth and development (Dweck, 2006). This typecasting may contribute to self-fulfilling prophecies and hinder students from exploring alternative learning strategies, ultimately hindering their academic progress (Dweck, 2006).

4. Misallocation of Resources

The continued acceptance of learning styles may result in the misallocation of resources within educational institutions (Paschler et al., 2008). By investing time and money in training teachers and developing learning materials based on a concept with weak empirical support, schools and districts divert valuable resources away from evidence-based practices (Hattie, 2009). This misallocation has significant implications for the quality of education and the academic success of students.

5. The Opportunity Cost of Ignoring Evidence-Based Practices

By propagating learning styles, the education community risks neglecting evidence-based practices that have been shown to improve learning outcomes (Hattie, 2009). These practices include formative assessment, feedback, metacognitive strategies, and collaborative learning, among others (Hattie, 2009; Zimmerman, 2002). By focusing on debunked theories such as learning styles, educators may miss opportunities to implement strategies that genuinely improve student learning.

Conclusion

The persistence of learning styles in educational discourse is a concerning phenomenon that warrants critical examination. Given the lack of empirical evidence and the potential harm caused by the propagation of learning styles, we urge educators and researchers to abandon this outdated concept and embrace evidence-based practices. By doing so, we can create a more inclusive, effective, and empirically grounded educational environment that benefits all learners.

Reference List

Coffield, F., Moseley, D., Hall, E., & Ecclestone, K. (2004). Learning styles and pedagogy in post-16 learning: A systematic and critical review. Learning and Skills Research Centre.

Dunn, R., & Griggs, S. A. (2000). Practical approaches to using learning styles in higher education. Greenwood Publishing Group.

Dweck, C. S. (2006). Mindset: The new psychology of success. Random House.

Geake, J. (2008). Neuromythologies in education. Educational Research, 50(2), 123-133.

Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. Routledge.

Pashler, H., McDaniel, M., Rohrer, D., & Bjork, R. (2008). Learning styles: Concepts and evidence. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 9(3), 105-119.

Scott, C. (2010). The enduring appeal of “learning styles.” Australian Journal of Education, 54(1), 5-17.

Willingham, D. T., Hughes, E. M., & Dobolyi, D. G. (2015). The scientific status of learning styles theories. Teaching of Psychology, 42(3), 266-271.

Zimmerman, B. J. (2002). Becoming a self-regulated learner: An overview. Theory into Practice, 41(2), 64-70.

GTP4

---

Enhancing the output with Grammarly

My first task was to tidy up this output further. I used Grammarly to perform the usual spelling, grammar, style and structure edits. This refined the output in a few places, mostly shortening some of the sentences. Interestingly, this tidying led to a dramatic improvement in readability, as measured by Yoast SEO.

I realised the article jumped into the topic a bit too directly, so copied three of the paragraphs from my earlier conversation with GTP4 to use as an introduction.

My next task with Grammarly was to check for originality. I didn’t want to accidentally plagiarism using the AI, so I ran a plagiarism check:

Phew! Good to go on that front.

So, by this point, I have used GTP 4 to do my writing, and Grammarly to improve it stylistically and grammatically. I popped the whole piece into WordPress and checked it out with Yoast CEO. I added a couple of words to the heading to improve how search engines index the page. Obviously, it flagged I needed images…

---

Adding images to the article

I returned to GTP4 and asked it to recommend some images:

Can you suggest some images to go with this article?

Prompt

and here is what it returned:

Certainly! Here are some image suggestions to complement the article:

1. Brain illustration: An image of the human brain, highlighting different regions responsible for various cognitive functions. This can visually emphasize the complex nature of learning and the oversimplification perpetuated by learning styles.
2. Classroom diversity: A photo of a diverse group of students engaged in various learning activities. This image can demonstrate the need for evidence-based practices that cater to individual differences, rather than relying on learning styles.
3. Growth mindset: A visual representation of a growth mindset, such as a seedling growing into a tree, to emphasize the importance of fostering a growth mindset and avoiding stereotypes associated with learning styles.
4. Evidence-based practices: An infographic or visual list highlighting key evidence-based teaching strategies (e.g., formative assessment, feedback, metacognitive strategies, collaborative learning) to emphasize the need for adopting these practices instead of learning styles.
5. Bar chart or graph: A visual representation of research data comparing the effectiveness of evidence-based practices versus learning styles, showcasing the lack of empirical support for learning styles and the benefits of evidence-based practices.

Remember to ensure that you have the appropriate permissions and licenses to use the images, especially if they are copyrighted. You can search for images on royalty-free stock photography websites like Unsplash, Pexels, or Pixabay, which offer a wide range of high-quality images that can be used without the need for attribution or licensing fees.

GTP4

Now… I could have used Unsplash, Pexels, or Pixabay – but this is all about AI, so I booted up DALL-E 2.

Using DALL-E 2 to generate images

I used the text from GTP4 as the prompt (unedited):

Classroom diversity: A photo of a diverse group of students engaged in various learning activities. This image can demonstrate the need for evidence-based practices that cater to individual differences, rather than relying on learning styles.

Prompt

Output:

I chose the first image.

My next prompt was:

Growth mindset: A visual representation of a growth mindset, such as a seedling growing into a tree, to emphasize the importance of fostering a growth mindset and avoiding stereotypes associated with learning styles.

Prompt

I don’t think any of them were quite right… so I asked for variations on the last one.

I chose the third image but edited the text off via Snagit.

Assembly

That was it! I had all the pieces of the jigsaw, so added those images to the Blog post and it was good to go. If you didn’t visit the link earlier, here is the result: Debunking the myth of Learning Styles – Dr Lee Fallin

Reflection and conclusion

So, time to revisit the question from the start:

Does this represent some horrific future where I’ve handed over work to an AI, de-skilling myself and removing my authorship?

OR

Have I demonstrated a high level of AI literacy, helping me to produce solutions quicker?

My answer? I think I’ve certainly demonstrated some good AI literacy, especially in my ability to weave together the use of GTP4, Grammarly, Dall-E 2 and Yoast CEO. However, the prompts were really nothing special. Nothing near the level of complexity from my experiments with GTP-3.5 and ChatGTP. This suggests GTP-4 really is a game changer.

Was I to keep doing this… I think it would lose the essence of who I am as a writer. As an academic. Colleagues and students have commented on my style, and they seem to like what I’m doing. The use of AI to this level would remove that. It would remove what makes me and my work special and distinctive. I wouldn’t be developing and learning.

Don’t get me wrong, the output works – but it does nothing for me, my development and my growth. It does nothing for my understanding.

I can only hope students do not fall into this trap. I can only hope assessment adapts to not let this happen. Don’t get me wrong! Some assessments should ask students to demonstrate their AI literacy, but we have to ensure they stay far away from such tools for the development of their broader understanding and learning.

For colleagues expecting essays and written work over the next few months – these tools certainly pose a challenge to the established written assessment. What worries me more is access. I paid $20 dollars to get early access. Very few students can afford this as a monthly cost. Just like hardware and the internet, AI is presenting another frontier for inclusion. Another frontier for the haves and the have-nots.

Please comment with your thoughts below.