31 Case Study: Summarizing arguments
The scenario
Remy had an open-note quiz coming up, and a knot of anxiety tightened in their stomach. It was on a set of articles about how watching cute animal videos can improve mental health. Remy hadn’t had a chance to read the articles yet, even though it sparked their interest. With only an hour to spare before class, they turned to a GenAI tool. Remy uploaded the articles and prompted the tool to, “Summarize these articles and list the main points and examples discussed.”
Almost instantly, the GenAI spat out a short, easy-to-read outline, highlighting key findings and common examples.
Feeling a huge wave of relief, Remy decided to use only this GenAI summary to answer every question on the quiz. The questions ranged from identifying specific psychological effects to naming research methodologies. They created their answers from the GenAI’s bullet points, feeling confident because the summary sounded smart and detailed. However, they never actually dug into the original articles’ deeper research, its detailed arguments, or the nuanced conclusions the article’s author had drawn from the data.
What appropriate and inappropriate uses of GenAI are in this scenario?
- GenAI for summary – Remy’s initial use of GenAI was potentially appropriate. Using a GenAI tool to summarize an article and list main points can be a valid way to quickly get an overview of a topic. This can be a useful study aid or a way to pre-read material to gauge its relevance and understand its structure before a deep dive.
- Relying solely on the GenAI summary to answer a pop quiz without ever reading the original articles constitutes an inappropriate use. A quiz is designed to test a student’s personal comprehension, critical thinking, and engagement with the source material.
- Bypassed critical thinking: The GenAI provided the answers, so Remy didn’t have to analyze the information or form their own conclusions – which hurts overall learning.
