top of page
Search
Writer's pictureClaire Brady

Why Using tools like ChatGPT or Gemini isn’t like using a Web Browser (Yet)

Imagine a world where students can instantly access and synthesize vast amounts of information without sifting through countless web pages. This isn't science fiction—it's the promise of large language models (LLMs) like ChatGPT, Google Gemini, and Claude. With the rise of LLMs there’s a common misconception that these tools are simply the next evolution of the web browser. OpenAI's recent move to eliminate the login requirement for ChatGPT sent shockwaves through the tech world, signaling a bold challenge to the long-standing dominance of Google and Microsoft in the highly monetized browser space.While both enable access to vast amounts of information, using an LLM is not (yet) the same as typing a query into Google, Chrome, or Safari. As higher education professionals and leaders, it's important to understand the distinction and the opportunities and challenges these tools present.


Web Browser vs. LLM

A traditional web browser acts as a window to the internet, directing users to curated sources of information via hyperlinks. It requires users to filter through data, evaluate sources, and make decisions on the reliability of content. In contrast, LLMs like ChatGPT, Gemini, or Claude use AI to synthesize data, generating responses based on patterns and predictions from massive datasets. This allows users to get more conversational and human-like answers, but it also raises important concerns.


Lack of Source Transparency

While a browser shows you where information comes from, LLMs don’t always make it clear how they’ve derived their answers or what sources they rely on. Users don’t have the ability to verify facts or trace information back to original documents, which can create challenges for academic integrity and research.


  • Academic integrity: How do we cite AI-generated content?

  • Research methodology: Can AI-sourced information be considered reliable for academic work?

  • Teaching critical evaluation: How do we train students to verify information when sources aren't apparent?


Potential for Hallucinations

LLMs are known to "hallucinate," meaning they may confidently produce incorrect or misleading information. While a browser leads you to reputable (and not-so-reputable) websites, LLMs can blend truths and inaccuracies seamlessly, making it difficult to discern fact from fiction.


  • Student learning: How do we ensure students aren't internalizing false information?

  • Academic publishing: What safeguards are needed to prevent AI-generated inaccuracies in research papers?

  • Institutional communication: How do we maintain credibility when using AI for content creation?


Contextual Understanding and Limitations

LLMs generate content based on patterns in their training data but lack the nuanced understanding that a person using a web browser might apply. They don’t have real-time access to the web or databases unless explicitly integrated, limiting their ability to provide up-to-date information.


  • Curriculum development: How do we teach students to complement AI tools with traditional research methods?

  • Professional development: How do we train faculty to effectively integrate and critically use LLMs?

  • Admissions processes: How might AI tools affect the way we evaluate applicant essays and personal statements?


In Closing

While LLMs represent a powerful tool for enhancing productivity and creativity, they should be seen as a complement to—not a replacement for—the traditional web browser. Until issues of transparency, accuracy, and source verification are resolved, higher education professionals must use them cautiously, encouraging students and faculty to rely on critical thinking and multiple resources to verify AI-generated information.



5 views0 comments

Comments


bottom of page