In my final experiment of the day with GTP-4, I am using the earlier AI-generated blog post, Debunking the myth of Learning Styles as the base. Peter Hartley spurred this post, acknowledging there was more fun yet to be had with GTP4 and this base material. He was right (and I promise the image at the top of this article will make sense by the end!).
First up – let’s see how the AI grades itself.
Using GTP4 to grade writing produced by GTP4
As I still have the entire conversation detailed earlier in AI-led blogging: An experiment with GTP4, DALL-E & Grammarly, I was able to prompt the grading directly. I asked:
Grade your earlier message that is Titled: Debunking the Learning Styles Myth: A Call for Evidence-Based Educational Practices
You are a Lecturer working at a prestigious university in the United Kingdom. You are to grade this work on a number scale from 0 to 100. A score below 40 represents a fail. You will need to provide detailed feedback to justify your grade, and you should identify areas of improvement to help your student take their work further next time.Prompt
And the grade it gave itself?
Title: Debunking the Learning Styles Myth: A Call for Evidence-Based Educational Practices Grade: 85/100
Overall, this article is well-written, presenting a coherent and compelling argument against the concept of learning styles. The language is formal and appropriate for a specialist audience, and the structure is clear and organized. The article also demonstrates a good understanding of the relevant literature.
Areas of improvement:
- Depth of analysis: While the article covers the main arguments against learning styles, it would benefit from a more in-depth analysis of specific studies that debunk the concept, providing a more comprehensive critique.
- Counterarguments: Addressing potential counterarguments and providing refutations can strengthen your argument. Consider discussing the reasons behind the popularity of learning styles and possible alternative explanations for the observed effects.
- Practical implications: It would be beneficial to discuss specific examples of how evidence-based practices can be implemented in educational settings, giving readers a clearer understanding of the alternatives to learning styles.
- Source integration: While the article cites relevant sources, it could benefit from a more seamless integration of these sources into the text. Using direct quotes or paraphrasing specific ideas from the sources can help build a more robust argument.
- Originality: Although the article presents a well-established critique of learning styles, try to incorporate more original ideas or unique perspectives to make the argument more engaging and thought-provoking for your audience.
In summary, this article demonstrates strong writing skills, a clear structure, and an understanding of the relevant literature. To improve the article, focus on deepening the analysis, addressing counterarguments, discussing practical implications, integrating sources more effectively, and incorporating original ideas. Keep up the good work and continue to develop your critical thinking and writing skills.GTP4
Evaluating the feedback
Not a bad evaluation. In reality, an actual university assignment probably wouldn’t score this well in presenting only one view (unless that was the task). It is correct in that counterarguments are required.
It is also interesting to see it suggest the use of direct quotes – something we’d generally ask students to avoid in order to demonstrate their own understanding.
The nod towards originality and depth of analysis very much capture the goals required for higher-level grades.