Last week’s column focused on optimism. I figured it was appropriate as we were ready to open a new chapter for the new year.

The column included examples of how optimism leads to improved mental and physical health. It focused on the “glass half full” mindset, which translates to positive thinking. It even included a quote from Dr. Seuss’ “Oh, the Places You’ll Go!”

I believe in every single word and idea in that column.

But ... I did not write it. I “suggested” it.

Last week’s column was an experiment, suggested by our future son-in-law, Landon, prompted by a holiday weekend discussion.

I’ll explain in a minute (or two, depending on your reading rate).

When I taught English, I could read a student’s essay and, even if it did not include a name, could identify who wrote it. Each student has his or her own writing style - a voice - distinct to them. Sometimes it was a word, a turn of phrase, or the simple cadence of sentence structure that clued me in as to the paper’s author.

If you’re a longtime reader of -Isms, you could (or should) easily be able to pick out a LuAnn-penned column. It’s a rhythm thing. And, I tend to use the suggested “power of three” when giving examples.

Segue back to Christmas ... We were discussing ChatGPT, an artificial intelligence chatbot introduced in November. It utilizes GPT-3.5 language technology that has been “trained” on text data from a variety of sources.

For last week’s column, I asked the bot to write about optimism at a high school level and include anecdotes of how being optimistic can lead to a happier and healthier version of an individual.

This former English instructor will give the chatbot a “D” for its -Isms response. It models a five-paragraph essay format but doesn’t take a deep dive into the topic. Personally, stronger examples are needed and that comes when a writer interjects his or her experience.

I learned of the technology after a former colleague shared information on the bot earlier in December. My gut reaction: it feels like a participation trophy for attempting to write a paper, even if a student may not be able to formulate a coherent thesis or organize ideas or develop solid analysis.

The more I have read about the chatbot, the longer I’ve had to think about how it could be integrated into curriculum and utilized as a teaching tool. For students who struggle to develop ideas, ChatGPT could be used during a brainstorming session. For example, I asked it to write a five-paragraph essay comparing “The Great Gatsby” to “The Grapes of Wrath.” I didn’t specify a writing level, per se, just added “academic” as a keyword.

The result wouldn’t have earned an “A” from this former instructor, but the ideas it paralleled and contrasted could help a student identify key themes, including social and economic inequality, corruption of wealthy elite, harsh realities of poverty and exploitation and obstacles to obtain the American dream.

I can see how the chat-generated essays could be used to teach analysis. Using the example of Gatsby versus Grapes, students could dig for examples from both texts to support the point and interpret the text. Students could scrutinize a character’s motives by featuring a character’s background and how it furthers said character’s behavior.

Or, generate an essay from ChatGPT and ask students to improve it. Add details, dig into the how and why of the topic.

It’s a helpful organizer. Why not use it to teach writing, as a craft, to younger students.

Is the AI foolproof? Absolutely not. I’ve read several accounts where the chat misrepresents facts. The open source can only be as good as the information - text - it is fed. It’s not a search engine, like Safari or Google. It uses information it has been fed through 2021.

I can also see how it can be detrimental.

In a world already lacking competent communication skills, ChatGPT may seem like the end of the written word. This should not be the case. Strong written and verbal communication skills will still be important. One-on-one communication will need to exist so each of us can express our unique point of view. Otherwise, we’ll all end up filled with nothing but artificial intelligence, skimming the surface, instead of being critical thinkers.

I’ve seen plenty of memes and videos saying, “It’s 11:38 and my (insert-year-of-education) essay is due at 11:59.” Then they rush to a computer, type in a few suggestions and presto! A ChatGPT essay is complete. I’m sure there are plenty of students who will use the AI this way. That may be ok if you want a below-average to average grade.

In the education world, ChatGPT has brought to light the correlation between knowledge and aptitude. Is writing the best means to measure intelligence? No, yet the education world links writing to standardized testing and standardized testing to regurgitation of material instead of digging deeper into each student’s development.

But I digress ... that’s a column for another day.

Consider ChatGPT a tool, like spellcheck or Cliff’s Notes. It can be useful, but it shouldn’t become the end-all, be-all when it comes to writing.

If you want to skim the surface, the bot will suffice. Eventually, it will become smarter, too.

But if it’s depth you want in reading material, stick around and read this column and other writers who are creative and crafty when it comes to the written word.

Doubtful any bot will provide the witty repartee or in-depth experiences this writer shares.