I am sitting in an ALT ELESIG webinar and just saw Dominik Lukes from Oxford University suggest one way students, in all their glorious neurodivergence, could exploit potentials of Generative AI is to reorganise journal content into a different format to aid processing and comprehension. So, no time like the present, I thought I’d try it myself. The idea is to copy/ paste the original text into a tool like ChatGPT then using a prompt like this:

Identify all authors in this text, put them in table and add content to each cell based on the following headings: authors; title of text; key points raised in this article [then pasted in the text from my article]

this is the output:

Authors	Title of Text	Key Points Raised in This Article
Compton (2023)	N/A	Critiques the traditional examination system, citing issues of scalability and pedagogical incompatibility. The pandemic has prompted the consideration of alternative assessment methods, however there’s a renewed call for traditional exams since campuses have reopened.
Williams and Wong (2009)	The efficacy of final examinations: A comparative study of closed‐book, invigilated exams and open‐book, open‐web exams	Closed book exams are deemed outdated in the context of a knowledge economy and counterproductive to constructive learning theories that promote deep learning. Open book exams, which reduce pressure on memorization, provide less opportunities and temptations for academic dishonesty.
Lawrence & Day (2021)	How do we navigate the brave new world of online exams?	Argues that tradition and convenience often inform the continued use of traditional exams. These exams could lead to reduced marking time when feedback is not required.
Durning et al. (2016)	Comparing open-book and closed-book examinations: a systematic review	Supports that traditional exams promote rigor, particularly in medical education. Students tend to study more assiduously for these exams, which could lead to better outcomes for patients.
Johanns et al. (2017)	A systematic review comparing open-book and closed-book examinations: Evaluating effects on development of critical thinking skills	Points out that misunderstandings about open book exams and overconfidence can lead students to waste time searching for answers. Well-designed open book exams can be seen as more authentic, applicable to real-world scenarios, and more learner-directed.
Downes (2017)	University scandal, reputation and governance	Argues that closed-book, in-person exams can reduce cheating compared to other assessment types. Also notes that online exams increase the likelihood of cheating and confusion about what is permissible.
D’Souza and Siegfeldt (2017)	A conceptual framework for detecting cheating in online and take‐home exams	Aligns with Downes, arguing that in-person exams are less susceptible to cheating.
Ottaway et al. (2017)	Cheating after the test: who does it and how often?	Claims that high-achieving students are more likely to cheat on exams.
Simonite (2010)	The impact of coursework on degree classifications and the performance of individual students	Suggests that exams favour high-achieving students, however, the combination of coursework and exams tend to give better results in terms of final degree outcomes.
Williams (2006)	The place of the closed book, invigilated final examination in a knowledge economy	Contests the belief that closed book exams are less prone to cheating.
Chirumamilla et al. (2020)	Cheating in e-exams and paper exams: the perceptions of engineering students and teachers in Norway	Points out that online exams are perceived to be more reliable and efficient, but both staff and students perceive more opportunities for cheating in online modes.
Bengtsson (2019)	Take-home exams in higher education: a systematic review	Argues that traditional exams focus on recall and memorization rather than higher order/critical thinking. Such exams also put unnatural pressure on students, impacting their performance.
Clemmer et al. (2018)	Will that be on the exam?-Student perceptions of memorization and success in engineering	Points out that students using memorization techniques may perceive exams as unfair if questions do not reflect content they have practiced.
Rich (2011)	An experimental study of differences in study habits and long-term retention rates between open-book and closed-book exams in a water resources engineering class	Suggests that open-book exams encourage students to adopt more effective study habits and demonstrate better long-term retention of course material.

For me, this would have been a complete game chnager when I was a student, espceilly when conducting literature reviews.

Source article is here.

How to do this- step by step:

1. Select the Content: First, you need to choose the article or content you want to summarise. The content could be a journal article, a blog post, a news report, or any written material.
2. Copy the Content: Once you have the content, copy the entire text or the relevant portions you want summarised. This is your raw material for the summarisation task.
3. Navigate to ChatGPT: Open a new browser window and navigate to the ChatGPT interface. This could be a website or an application where you can interact with the ChatGPT model.
4. Paste the Content: Paste the copied content into the chatbox of ChatGPT. You need to be careful not to exceed the maximum character limit allowed by the tool.
5. Create a Prompt: After pasting the content, create a prompt for the model to structure the summary. Here’s an example prompt: “Identify all authors in this text, put them in a table and add content to each cell based on the following headings: authors; title of text; key points raised in this article.”
6. Run the Model: After inputting the prompt, press enter or click the appropriate button to execute the command. The model will process the input and produce an output based on your prompt.
7. Review the Output: Review the generated summary and make sure all the key points from the original content are captured accurately. If necessary, refine your prompt and rerun the model.
8. Copy the Output: If you’re satisfied with the output, copy it for use in your desired application.
9. Refine and Iterate: Keep in mind that AI models like ChatGPT may require a few iterations to get the desired output. Don’t hesitate to refine your prompts and iterate the process.

This method will allow you to create a structured summary of any written content. Note that the AI will follow your prompts, so be as specific as you can to get the best results.