Students are taught a system of marking scripts and monologues using a series of steps to highlight the flow of action, including shifts in objectives and tactics (what the character wants, and the active language describing how they hope to get what they want). Students are challenged to mark a monologue themselves using these criteria taught in class. Students will then upload their monologue into ChatGPT and ask it to score the monologue using the same criteria. Students will compare and contrast the two monologues and evaluate what ChatGPT created that was useful, and what ChatGPT may have missed. Students will have the opportunity to perform both scored versions of the monologue (their own and ChatGPT) to also judge any change in the performance product. Finally, students will have the opportunity to combine what they liked from both scored monologues, and perform the final product for the class. The presumed outcome is that ChatGPT can be a great resource for finding new language and shifts they may have missed, but also may place shifts in inappropriate places and use language that could be presumed as 'inhuman' or lacking humanity.
Student Learning Outcomes
Information Literacy, Critical Inquiry and Analysis, Quantitative Reasoning, Written Communication, Oral Communication
Emily Wirkus. "Is AI an Actor?" (2023). AI Assignment Library. 23.