Teaching Effectively with ChatGPT with Dan Levy and Angela Pérez Albertos

I have now read a few books on the intersection of higher education teaching and generative AI, and Teaching Effectively with ChatGPT is by far my favorite. There’s no hyperbole here, just practical advice on making the most of generative AI with dozens of concrete examples from the authors and from other instructors in their network. The book was written by Dan Levy, senior lecturer in public policy at Harvard Kennedy School, and Angela Pérez Albertos, who was first a student in Dan’s class, then a teaching assistant working with Dan, and is now the head of U.S. strategy at Innovamat, a global educational organization focusing on math learning. 

Today I get to share my conversation with Dan and Angela about Teaching Effectively with ChatGPT, and I think you’ll find it interesting, whether you’re eagerly embracing AI in your teaching, actively resisting it, or somewhere in between.

Episode Resources:

Teaching Effectively with ChatGPT website

Dan Levy’s faculty page

Angela Pérez Albertos on LinkedIn

A short ChatGPT prompt to learn about anything

“Talking to Colleagues about Generative AI” by me

“AI-Enhanced Live Polling” by me

Transcript

Copy Transcript Copied

Derek Bruff 0:26

Welcome to Intentional Teaching, a podcast aimed at educators to help them develop foundational teaching skills and explore new ideas in teaching. I'm your host, Derek Bruff. I hope this podcast helps you be more intentional in how you teach and in how you develop as a teacher over time.

Derek Bruff 0:48

This past spring, I had the good fortune to facilitate a reading group for faculty and other instructors at the University of Virginia on a new book called Teaching Effectively with ChatGPT. The book provides incredibly practical advice for using generative AI in our teaching and for helping students use AI in thoughtful and productive ways in their learning. The book inspired a lot of rich discussion during our reading group meetings, and I'm grateful for the ways that my colleagues at UVA approach this topic with intention and creativity and a desire to do right by their students.

Derek Bruff 1:20

I have now read a few books on the intersection of higher education teaching and generative AI, and Teaching Effectively with ChatGPT is by far my favorite. There's no hyperbole in the book, just practical advice on making the most of generative AI, with dozens of concrete examples from the authors and from other instructors in their network. The book was written by Dan Levy, senior lecturer in public policy at Harvard Kennedy School. and Angela Perez-Albertos, who was first a student in Dan's class, then a teaching assistant working with Dan, and is now the head of U.S. Strategy at InnovaMat, a global education organization focusing on math learning.

Derek Bruff 2:00

Dan and I go back to at least 2020 when he very quickly wrote a very useful book on teaching on Zoom, and I interviewed him for my old podcast, Leading Lines. After the UVA reading group wrapped up, I reached out to Dan to tell him how much I appreciate the book and to invite Dan and his co-author on the podcast. Today, I get to share my conversation with Dan and Angela, and I think you'll find it interesting whether you're eagerly embracing AI in your teaching, actively resisting it, or somewhere in between.

Derek Bruff 2:31

Well, welcome, both of you. I'm so glad to have you on the podcast to talk about your book, Teaching Effectively with ChatGPT. I'm a big fan of this book, and I'm excited to pick your brains about the writing of the book and where you see generative AI going in higher ed right now. So thank you for being here.

Angela Pérez Albertos 2:48

Thank you so much for having us, Derek.

Dan Levy 2:50

Thank you, Derek. It's an honor to be here with you.

Derek Bruff 2:53

Before we talk about AI, I'm going to ask my usual opening question of both of you. Can you tell us about a time when you realized you wanted to be an educator?

Angela Pérez Albertos 3:03

I remember very specific, this is probably one of my earliest memories. I was in high school and we were in a physics class and it was a very hard topic. I can't remember what it was exactly something about, you know, like gravity or something like that. And the whole class was struggling to make sense of, you know, the lesson. And I... was able to understand what was happening and the teacher asked me to come to the front of the room and explained it to the rest of my classmates. Basically because Ii had just made the the effort right of like going from not knowing anything about the topic to like making sense of of the lesson i explained it to the rest of the classroom and you know not everybody of course it's always hard to like help everybody but many of my um classmates you know had that aha moment of making sense of of the topic and it helped me you know, that was such a powerful moment for me. It's like that addiction of being able to help people learn and make sense of complex things that I got hooked into. And it was one of the first times that, you know, I realized I wanted to, you know, be able to continue doing that for the rest of my life.

Derek Bruff 4:17

Wow. Wow. I love that. That, that near peer experience where you're like one step ahead of your peers and that puts you in a great position to explain something. I love that. Yeah. How about you, Dan?

Dan Levy 4:29

I had never heard this from Angela, and I'm very glad to hear it. My story is very similar to hers. I was in high school, and a math teacher asked me if I could lead some extra sessions for students who were having trouble. And I found the sessions and the act of helping others learn to be profoundly helpful. stimulating both intellectually and emotionally. And so I think from that moment on, I pursued every opportunity I had to try to do things that would qualify in the realm of teaching. Very, very similar experiences.

Angela Pérez Albertos 5:21

And we didn't know this from each other, but now it makes a lot of sense that we work together.

Dan Levy 5:26

There you go.

Derek Bruff 5:26

Yeah. Yeah. These are the early formative experiences. Yes. I did some tutoring of math in high school and it was college for me where I really got to work with students over time and realize how much I enjoyed that near peer work. Yes. Well, let's talk about your book, Teaching Effectively with ChatGPT. And if I've looked at this correctly, it isn't until page 185 that you focus in the book on ways that students can use chat GPT. You spend the first big part of the book discussing ways that instructors can use generative AI in their teaching. I'm curious, I have a theory, but I'm curious, why did you structure the book that way?

Dan Levy 6:12

I think your theory is right if I know what your theory is from your writing, which is, as I'm sure you face yourself in speaking with other educators, when faculty members or teachers hear about AI, for many of them, the first thing that comes to their mind is students are going to use this to cheat and to do... things that are not consistent with learning. So we felt, and we have done that not just in the book, but also in the workshops that we organize about the book, that it's best to start by helping educators see how they can use AI to improve their craft. And once they do that, I think most of them are more open to the idea that AI could be used for students as well. So I think it was a deliberate strategy. I'm not sure it works, but I think it is consistent with something that you wrote recently about how you help educators use AI.

Angela Pérez Albertos 7:29

That captured it very well. I would say the other big thing in the thinking was that the most tangible benefit that AI can bring to educators is accelerating the efficiency of the daily tasks that they do. And that's something that can act as a hook for educators that may be still a bit reluctant to explore AI in their teaching and that front-facing that in the book could generate that early motivation to continue deep diving into the topic.

Derek Bruff 8:07

Yeah, well, as Dan indicated, I found this to be true, that if you start off by talking with the kind of student use of AI, then you quickly get stuck in conversations around academic integrity and learning loss and things like that. And those are important conversations to have, but I find that often they're more productive conversations if if we start with a firmer grounding of how AI works and how we might use it in our own work. I do want to ask, Dan, you had emailed me about this, I think, over the weekend. There was one use in particular, speaking of instructor use of AI, that of course caught my eye given my long experience looking at the teaching with polling tools in the classroom. And that's using AI to do a kind of live analysis of the results of an open-ended question. And I'd love, Dan or Angela, if you can share an example or two of that type of in-class use of AI.

Dan Levy 9:09

Plenty of

Angela Pérez Albertos 9:10

amazing examples.

Dan Levy 9:11

Yeah. Maybe I'll get started. I first want to do something that I hope you don't cut from the podcast, which is to say to you, Derek, that you are responsible for this book. You don't know it, but you are. I think one of the first books I read about teaching was your book about classroom response. systems. And it was profoundly impactful for me. I had been experimenting with the use of clickers at the time now with polling tools. And in that book, you just open up like a whole new world. I was using it in such a rudimentary way. And by bringing examples of other educators who were using the tool to advance learning, I was simply hooked. And I think it was responsible for the book that I wrote about teaching effectively with Zoom. You can see your fingerprints in the book because I tried to write in a way similar by using examples of educators to illustrate broader points. And you can see it in the book that Angela and I just wrote. So First, big gratitude to you for that.

Dan Levy 10:31

Now, since we're talking about polling, I don't know what your experience has been, but every time that a presenter puts on a slide and says, let's do a word cloud about this, I find the exercise not very helpful. because the word clouds are just counting words and often the words that appear are words that you can't really make meaning out of. And when generative AI came out, this felt like, oh my God, we have a tool that can now process text very quickly and summarize themes. Maybe as you say in your blog, not to the degree that you would use in qualitative work for research, but in a way of giving you a sense of where the class is. And got together with a student who had skills in this. In a whiteboard in my office, we sort of planned how we were gonna do it because in essence, I was trying to do what in your blog you described you did, which is, okay, Lau, let me get the answers in the classroom and put them into ChatGPT. And so he developed this tool. And now I think I use it almost every week to try to assess where students or participants are in anything that's different from a multiple choice kind of question.

Dan Levy 12:08

And so typical uses for me are I mean, you would recognize the one-minute paper is something that many, many instructors use, which is at the end of class, ask, you know, what's your main takeaway or maybe the muddiest point or any of those techniques where you just want to assess at the end what did people get out of the class. And so the previous workflow was like, okay... Pieces of paper come, then you go back to your office and then maybe you try to make sense of them. And then the next class, you might sort of say something about them. And this workflow with the help of generative AI is such that you put a QR code, students scan the QR code, they type their answer, and then you're able to see right there, live in the classroom, what was the main takeaways.

Dan Levy 13:07

And our tool in particular also has the names of the students that contributed to the themes. So that allows you to have further conversations. The tool also allows you to select a few quotes that have certain characteristics. And all of this you can do with generative AI these days. So it's not just summarized for you quickly. It's summarized for you quickly and then be able to take action right there in the classroom without having to wait. So that is, I think, the canonical use, but you can use it at any point in the classroom. You can use it for, you know, in the middle of class, what are questions that are emerging, for example, that students might be too shy to ask. And so, in the interest of time, I'm going to pause there and maybe Angela has other things to add to it.

Angela Pérez Albertos 14:05

Well, that was perfect, right? And you elaborated in detail. What I would perhaps add from the student perspective is how the human experience shapes the way that students participate in the classroom and how important it is to understand what's going on in the students' minds and feelings when teachers ask the question, who has questions at the end of class, right? And, you know, if there are no arms that are raised at that point, it can be for a very wide number of reasons, many of which have nothing to do with whether students actually have questions or not, right? And so one of the things that we found that was very interesting as we were doing this research and talking to students about the integration of AI in the classroom and their learning experience was that students actually felt much more comfortable either asking questions in an anonymous way or asking questions directly to an AI tool because they didn't want to be seen as the person that had not understand the lesson or that was not understanding what was going on. And this is true for just like a normal conversation in AI, but what's more powerful about doing that in a classroom setting is that just with one person asking a question or saying, I don't understand something, that validates the 15 other people in the classroom that haven't actually asked that question, but it helps them see, oh, I'm, it's okay for me to not understand, right? I'm not alone. I'm not alone in this. And eventually the more that you do this, the more that I believe it's going to encourage people to feel that they're in a safe environment to say, I don't understand. And this is perfectly fine. This is why we are here in a classroom because, you know, we have things to learn together.

Derek Bruff 16:10

Yeah. And I, Dan, you mentioned my book on teaching with classroom response systems from 2009, which feels like a generation ago now.

Dan Levy 16:20

You can trace back your impact 16 years now.

Derek Bruff 16:26

Thank you for the kind words about the book. I look back now and I don't think it was very well written, but it did have really good examples, so I'm glad you appreciated that part of it. I led a reading group on your, on your book this spring. And, and I've seen how higher education has paid attention to books on this topic. And I suspect that there's some, some group of faculty who are waiting for the book, right? They're waiting for someone to have figured out enough to put it down on paper. Um, I don't want the half form thought from your blog post. I want, I want the, I want the fully formed thought that comes in the book. Um, I do wonder, Dan, were you concerned about the timeliness of your book?

Dan Levy 17:12

Yes. So maybe a little bit of history. The first book that I wrote about teaching was called Teaching Effectively with Zoom. And that book was, I felt like the timing was perfect in that we were all, as Angela said, reading blog posts and, you know, at the time, Twitter posts and other things, trying to figure out, you know, how you use discussion room to break out rooms and how to use chat and all of that. And I felt it was crazy. It was crazy that we were all trying to, through a very disorganized process, trying to do it. So at the time, I felt a book needs to be written where essentially one stop shop. And that was the impulse for that book.

Dan Levy 18:12

This one, the one Angela and I wrote, I think the timing was a lot trickier. Because in essence, I thought, okay, this thing is going to disrupt everything that we do. And... I toyed with the idea of writing this book a year earlier, but I really didn't feel like I knew enough about it. And I felt like we needed to experiment more with it before writing anything that feels like would be useful to faculty. It was a blessing because Angela came along. We worked together on the book. The book benefited from a lot of collaborators inside the university. So I teach a course on generative AI with Sharad Goel and Teddy Svoronos, and they've been wonderful partners in not just teaching about AI, but teaching using generative AI and work. currently experimenting with a bunch of things. Other instructors around the university use generative AI to create bots, to do all sorts of interesting things.

Dan Levy 19:33

So... Do I feel like three years from now, things will have changed? Of course, things will have changed. But I think waiting until the dust settles is really not the answer. It really is not. I think right now you as an instructor can get a lot of value out of generative AI. You can do it in a way that saves time. You can do it in a way that saves you from having to do things that you dread doing, and you can do it in ways that advance learning. Obviously, there are all sorts of challenges with a generative AI, but putting our head in the sand and sort of saying, I'm just going to wait until the dust settles is not really the answer. I can't emphasize that enough because it's happening whether we want it or not. It is happening. And so the question is, how can we make the best out of it? Has the world of AI evolved since we wrote the book? Absolutely. But I don't think it has evolved in a way that has really changed the main things that we think are pedagogically advancing what an instructor can do.

Dan Levy 20:51

So in any case, I would say the timing of the first book was, I thought... accidentally excellent. The timing of this book, I don't think there was an optimal timing. I think I'm glad we wrote it when we wrote it. I think we could have waited for a little bit more. We could have also written a little bit earlier. I don't know that it would have made a big difference.

Angela Pérez Albertos 21:14

It's interesting that, I don't know if you agree with this, but back in May, exactly one year ago, we were finalizing the book and I don't think I imagined that I would be on a podcast one year from now because back then it just seemed that the rate of advancement in AI was such that in a year the book would be completely outdated. Or not completely, right? But so dated it wouldn't be adding so much value that we would be able to do actions like this. And I think it's interesting to... you know, see how the history in education technology advancements repeats over and over again, where like a new technology comes in, it seems it's going to completely revolutionize, you know, the system, but then the frictions or, you know, inertia of the educational system is such that it's, it's just hard to make big changes, right? Does this mean that AI is not gonna transform everything that we do? Not necessarily, but I do think that the rate of adoption and the rate of change has been lower than at least what I was anticipating back when we were writing the book.

Derek Bruff 22:28

Yeah, yeah, well, and I'll concur. I think if you had asked me to make predictions 12 months ago about faculty responses to AI, I would have predicted kind of more movement there than I've actually seen in the last 12 months. There's been a lot of movement, certainly, but it felt, you know, a couple of years ago that we were going to have to change everything really quickly. And that has happened in pockets, but not in other pockets.

Derek Bruff 22:53

In chapter eight, you write about Angela's use of chat GPT in a philosophy course about the idea of morality. And there's this nice extended example where you kind of present, here's a lazy way to use ChatGPT. Give me five arguments in favor of this thesis. Give me five arguments against. And then you contrast that with a more thoughtful way where you ask ChatGPT to take on a persona and engage in a kind of simulated debate around the topic as a way to kind of prompt your own thinking. And I feel like a lot of people who come into thinking about ChatGPT start with that lazy use. Ask a question, get an answer, move on with their life. But that is almost never the way that it's described in your book. It's much more iterative. It's much more conversational. It's engaging in a kind of self-expression and elaboration that's helpful to one's thinking. Why do you think the lazy use is such a common way to approach generative AI? And And did the two of you have any experiences that kind of shifted you away from, I'm wondering why you didn't go down that route as well.

Angela Pérez Albertos 24:09

Well, that's a big, big question. And I love that you, you bring up this, this example, um, uh, because it's, it's one of the uses that I feel both that, and I would be able to write on a much longer, uh, extension, uh, for, but, um, the question is valid, but, uh, I wouldn't only compare it to the lazy use of ChatGPT versus the thoughtful use of Chat GPT. I think the other comparison that we need to use is the lazy use of Chat GPT versus the lazy use of all of the other non-Chat GPT resources that students have to be able to complete their assignments in the classroom. Because what...

Angela Pérez Albertos 24:49

Something that I like to think about is that a student is only going to put on so much work in a classroom assignment as they want to. Students are always making decisions about how much motivation they have to actually do a classroom assignment in a way that's beneficial to their learning. Before the ChatGPT era, there were also resources up there in the internet that students could use in order to do a task in a very lazy way that did not benefit their learning at all. ChatGPT is just amplifying that because it's making the lazy use much easier than it was before. But it doesn't mean that before the ChatGPT era every student that was completing a task was learning in the process, right? And I feel this is an important distinction because I feel for educators, it's important to know that, right? It's not just about doing the check of our students doing the homework assignments or essays, but it's thinking about what's the learning that is actually happening in doing so. And Motivating students to actually engage in their learning, I find, is the most difficult task that educators have.

Angela Pérez Albertos 26:15

How do you actually create such an engagement that they are excited to learn about the topic that they have in front of them? And you will always find some people that are self-motivated to learn you know, on their own. And I feel like I'm, you know, I'm that kind of person that like you're, from what I know from you, you know, that's also you. But we cannot just count on, you know, everybody in a classroom to be, you know, self-motivated students. And so it's really about, you know, that question doesn't change with technology. I think it's like at the core of my argument, right? Like how does an educator motivate a student so that they put in the work that then leads them to actually learn in the process? It's something that now it's more important than before, but it's not a new question.

Dan Levy 27:11

I completely agree with Angela's description. In fact, I think you're already seeing in this episode why it was such a wise decision to partner with her. She has the student perspective all the time with her that was so valuable in the writing of this book. One of the things that we learned in interviewing students for this book that was very powerful and certainly resonates with what Angela said we had a focus group and asked students, in essence, when do you decide to use ChatGPT in the lazy way that you're describing there? And the answer came really very clearly with the students saying, I use ChatGPT whenever I think the assignment that the instructor gives me adds little value to my education. Now, we as instructors might debate whether a student is in a position to judge or not, whether it's adding value to their education or not. But if anything, I think chat GPT or generative AI more generally, I mean, the book is about chat GPT, but it's, you know, you can use any of the LLMs to do this. Basically, students have a lot more agency now over how much time and effort they exert over the assignments that we give them. And I think that has made the motivational challenge that Angela pointed out a more important one than in the past.

Dan Levy 28:50

And it also, in my mind, has made us as instructors and educators, I think, more responsible for not just teaching stuff that's relevant to our students, but for persuading our students that it's relevant for them. And those two things don't always go hand in hand. So I would say lazy use of ChatGPT is very common and I think sometimes very helpful. But for learning, we do see... we do see that there are choices here. And one thing that I want to add, I'm not prone to exaggeration, but I really think that if you try to use generative AI for learning, you will discover that it can be an amazing tutor for you to learn about any topic in the world. In fact, if I could encourage anyone listening to your podcast If they could just grab and we'll make it available to you so they don't have to buy the book to get this or anything like that. But like literally a six or seven sentence prompt to learn about any topic that you want and spend five to 10 minutes in that exchange.

Dan Levy 30:11

As you said, Derek, I think the exchange was very interesting. It's very important. It's not just about, it's not a search. It really is about a conversation. You will discover that we've been talking about personalized learning for decades. And I really think that this is, in my mind, the first time we really are enabled to achieve that. I mean, we're not there yet in my mind, but we can use this tool in a way that personalizes the learning of our students and our own learning.

Derek Bruff 30:44

So I want to ask about, I think this is a good segue to this next question. There is a very vocal, I can't tell how big or small the segment is, but there's a very vocal segment of higher ed, which is advocating for faculty to resist the use of AI in teaching and learning altogether. And the reasons for the resistance often vary, right? Sometimes they're worried that about the risk to students' learning. Sometimes they're worried about the general devaluing of education or the environmental impact of generative AI tools, or just the fact that a lot of these tools are run by for-profit companies. I'm curious, have you encountered a kind of AI resistance in your work around this topic? And what does that look like? What has that looked like for you and how have you responded to that?

Dan Levy 31:38

Derek, in a blog post you wrote called Talking to Colleagues About Generative AI, you listed, I think, some of the reasons faculty are skeptical. One of them, it's not good for much. And I think, as you rightly point out in that blog post, you know, it's certainly not perfect. In fact, one of the main arguments we put forth in the book is the When trying to evaluate whether you should use AI, you shouldn't ask yourself, is AI better than me? Most of the time you'll conclude it's not. It's whether AI plus me is better than me. And I think you'll find as an educator many occasions in which it is because it helps you achieve the same level of output in less time or because it helps you achieve perhaps better output than you would have achieved on your own. And so... Given the way that it's evolving, I think it's likely to get better and better. And the equation of when is AI plus me better than me is likely to hold more and more often.

Dan Levy 32:56

This does not mean that there are not concerns about using AI in education. I think there are many concerns. I think as we say in the book, from a student perspective, AI can be used in ways that advance learning and it can be used in ways that hurt learning. And Angela gave an excellent example of how you can have both ways. But I don't think we're going to be able to advance education by simply saying we're not going to use AI. I think we have to weigh the benefits against the risks and manage the risks as best as we can. I do think that a student using AIs in ways that hurt their learning is a huge challenge, is one that we should sort of think about how to focus on. But I don't think we are going to be able to meet that challenge by resisting AI. I think we're going to meet that challenge in my mind by channeling AI and nudging students towards more productive uses. That can take a number of forms, but I think that's where we are.

Dan Levy 34:23

Are there other concerns about AI that should be in all of our minds? Of course, you know, environment, jobs, intellectual property, you name them. But I don't think they are just related to what we do in higher ed. They're larger concerns. And so I think as educators, I mean, obviously, we wrote a book about using generative AI to teach, so we have a view on this. But our view is not that AI is great and no concerns. Our view is that, you know, on balance, given that it's here, given that it's impossible to just ban it and sort of pretend that it's not there. But more importantly, given that we know that our students, when they graduate, are going to be using generative AI, to do the jobs that they're going to be doing, that there are entire jobs that are going to disappear because of generative AI, an entire set of jobs that are going to be created with the advent of generative AI. If we as, you know, as an institution of society think that part of our job is to prepare our students for that future world that's coming, I think I think the choice of seeing how we best use generative AI is pretty clear rather than resistive.

Angela Pérez Albertos 35:55

I can complement, fully agree with everything that Dan said. At the end of the day, of course, it's our view and it's very clear in the book. I'll complement with a bit of my recent experience because for context, I graduated last summer from my master's and went back into the workforce. And all the work that I did, like all my experimentation using ChatGPT and all the work that I did to create write this book, help me gain a level of mastery and help me automatically, every time I need to complete a task, think about how can AI help me. And that has now been so useful in my job, right? Because sometimes when you are on the job, you don't have so much time to really like gain your skills right or to really like go through the learning curve that's required as you're starting to experiment with ai for the first time right like that's something that's easier to do when you are a student but but it's that it's harder to do once you are in the in the workforce and the productivity that you have in many tasks when you are at a job when relying with chatGPT or AI versus when not relying with chatGPT or AI can be, like the difference can be massive, right? And so I think completely preventing or, you know, completely removing that part of the experience from the student experience would be akin to saying like, I don't want my students to learn how to communicate properly. Right. That's, you know, and I'm not, not, not, not that they're to the same level of expertise. Right. But, you know, it's, it's a skill that's going to be valuable, you know, likely in, you know, the majority of the jobs that students, that students like then go, go to take up afterwards.

Derek Bruff 38:04

Well, thank you both. I know this is, this is a hard landscape to navigate for faculty. And I, I agree that I think we navigate it better by engaging and not, certainly not avoiding. I don't think the resistors are avoiding either, but I appreciate your perspectives on this. And I think it's helpful to look to the future. Well, thank you both. I appreciate you coming on the podcast. This has been really fascinating and I can't wait to share this with my listeners. So yeah, thanks for being here. Thank you.

Angela Pérez Albertos 38:41

Thank you so much.

Derek Bruff 38:42

That was Dan Levy, Senior Lecturer in Public Policy at Harvard Kennedy School, and Angela Perez-Albertos, Head of U.S. Strategy at Innovamat. They are the authors of the 2024 book Teaching Effectively with ChatGPT, which is available digitally via Amazon for just $5 U.S. and as a paperback for just $15 U.S. In the show notes, you'll find a link to their book website, which is full of examples and resources from the book. I think the book is well worth your $5 or $15, but you can also learn a lot about using ChatGPT just from the website and the resources provided there. In fact, chapter 10 of the book, which is on creating customized chatbots, is entirely available for free on their website. Thanks to Dan and Angela for coming on the show and sharing about their book.

Derek Bruff 39:31

At the end of our conversation, I asked them both to respond to a question, inspired by one that I always asked on my old Leading Lines podcast. I asked them, what would you wish to see about the role of generative AI in higher ed over the next three to five years? Asking them not to predict the future so much as to help shape it through their preferences. You can hear their answers and my answer too in this week's bonus episode available to Intentional Teaching subscribers. See the show notes for a link to become a subscriber and support the work that I'm doing here.

Derek Bruff 40:02

Intentional Teaching is sponsored by UPCEA, the online and professional education association. In the show notes, you'll find a link to the UPCEA website, where you can find out about their research, networking opportunities, and professional development offerings. This episode of Intentional Teaching was produced and edited by me, Derek Bruff. See the show notes for links to my website and socials, and to the Intentional Teaching newsletter, which goes out most weeks on Thursday or Friday. If you found this or any episode of Intentional Teaching useful, would you consider sharing it with a colleague? That would mean a lot. As always, thanks for listening.