Live data from Hacker News

CheatGPT

blog.humphd.org

41–50 of 544 posts

Re: CheatGPT

#41
I think there' an initial reaction of something like "how dare they!?!?"

However, AI the type of tool that going to level up mankind's capabilities to the point that curriculums will need to adjust to fit those new capabilities. Certainly this has happened dozens of time in a field like Computer Science, where curriculum in 2023 is radically different than it was in the 60's and 70's.

This new rise in AI might be amongst the most disruptive forces ever in many fields, including academics, but at some point, you have to factor AI in as integral part of our day-to-day work and life and factor that into education.

This will be difficult, especially finding the line between what is fundamental and what is not, but it's not like this hasn't happened before -- e.g. the calculator didn't eliminate the need to learn basic arithmetic.

Re: CheatGPT

#42
post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

??? By this reasonning nobody should ever learn anything, because it's all 'trivially doable' by machine. Like 'addition' and 'subtraction'. So let's gaslight those dumb teachers by saying they should make up 'better' homework assignments?

>By this reasonning nobody should ever learn anything, because it's all 'trivially doable' by machine. >Like 'addition' and 'subtraction'. A better analogy would be low level coding. I don't know (or care) how my processor calculates `var f = 3+2` at the register level. And being able to ignore that allows me to focus on higher level concerns.

I see what you mean, but it's not really a better analogy.

We need to learn how to do addition at some point, so we can't have ChatGPT do that.

We need to learn how 'registers' work, so we can't have ChatGPT do that.

We need to learn basic algorithms work, so we can't have ChatGPT do that.

AKA - almost whatever is being assigned as homework, is the 'thing to be learned' and it's ridiculous to suggest that ChatGPT do that, and doubly so to gaslight teachers.

Re: CheatGPT

#43
Cheating in academia isn't a problem, because the only people students are cheating is themselves.

I've seen plenty of cheaters, they were the worst students, and despite cheating couldn't graduate or couldn't find a job after graduating.

If some moron is stupid enough to cheat when he's paying 50K a year, let them.

Re: CheatGPT

#44
post #8

> Apparently, it's not even something students feel they need to hide. Which is good! If a bit of work is trivially accomplished by a machine, we should take it for granted and move on to the next layer of complexity. I have always maintained that teachers complaining about students cheating at homework assignments with AI need to instead work on providing better homework.

Should we? Basic arithmetic has long since been solved, but I've met plenty of people who struggle at higher level math because they haven't mastered enough basic arithmetic. Solving complex problems will often involve many much simpler problems that must be solved as well. The time to offload this to another system to solve it for you is immensely more expensive than being able to solve it mentally, meaning that to solve the complex problem ends up being far more expensive as well. Eventually students will reach problems whose price they can no longer afford.

It is related to the reason we teach concepts starting with simple, small, easy to solve problems before building up. If I want to teach a student how to solve the limit of x*sin(1/x) as x approaches 0, I need them to understand quite a bit of math to even know what the problem is asking.

Re: CheatGPT

#45
According to the Department of Education, 54% of Americans have below a 6th grade reading level. [0]

Everyone thought that the kids who started using mobile devices as babies would become computer savants, but it turns out the kids these days don't understand what a file system is. [1]

What will ChatGPT do to our youth?

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Literacy_in_the_United_States#....

[1] https://www.theverge.com/22684730/students-file-folder-direc...

Re: CheatGPT

#46
Soon you will have to use version control and submit version history with homework. Though maybe chatgpt can generate that, too.

Re: CheatGPT

#47
post #13
post #8

> Apparently, it's not even something students feel they need to hide. Which is good! If a bit of work is trivially accomplished by a machine, we should take it for granted and move on to the next layer of complexity. I have always maintained that teachers complaining about students cheating at homework assignments with AI need to instead work on providing better homework.

The point of school work isn't to complete schoolwork, it's to learn.

It isn’t clear to me if you disagree with the GP.

Re: CheatGPT

#48

What ChatGPT (and its cousins) expose is that the way humans have been taught in most schools - memorizing and regurgitating information - is now a commodity. What humans being to the table over ChatGPT is our ability to create new links between information, aka creativity. Teaching creativity, imo, will require a return to the methods like those of Sophocles and his contemporaries. I would rather this author be writ…

Creativity doesn’t exist in isolation. In order to be creative, and create unexpected connections, one first needs to know a lot of seemingly unrelated things.

Re: CheatGPT

#49
I really like this blog post, I think it fairly describes some of the challenges teachers are going to face with this technology, while also admitting that this tech is inevitable.

> In my opinion, the students learning to program do not benefit from AI helping to "remove the drudgery" of programming. At some point, you have to learn to program. You can't get there by avoiding the inevitable struggles of learning-to-program.

I don’t disagree with this at all (at least for where we are now, in ten years, it might not matter as much), and I don’t want to be glib, but I do think the answer is to “teach students to program.” Don’t rely on rote assignments that you’re checking with an auto-grader (not saying this professor does that, but a lot do) and cookie-cutter materials; actually teach them to program.

And yes, LLMs will almost certainly mean that some students will cheat their way out of their assignments. But just like most cheaters who cheat on things they don’t fundamentally understand (which is different from people who cheat to hurry up and get through an exercise they could do in their sleep but don’t want to waste the energy doing), it will catch up to them when they have to do something that is not part of the rote assignment.

Or maybe, adjust how you test/assign homework. That isn’t to imply that that won’t take more work, but if your concern actually is that students aren’t learning and are just successfully copying and pasting, the testing/grading is the problem.

In high school (and college), I was a top student in math and in English. But I hated doing homework. In one math class in high school, although I got near perfect scores on all of my math exams, the teacher still gave me a C because 20% of my grade was “homework” that I didn’t do (I had already taken the same class a year earlier at another school — I didn’t need to do the homework. My math tutor my mom got me out of fear of my bad grade taught me Calculus and Fortran instead of trying to get me to do the useless homework). This taught me nothing and frankly, soured me on taking more advanced math classes that were all taught by this same teacher.

In contrast, I had an English teacher who would assign vocabulary homework. Basic, “write a sentence with each word” shit. Again, a total waste of time for me. So I worked out a deal with him, let me just orally tell you what each word means, saving us both time and energy. He took the additional step of assigning me/grading me on different criteria than the rest of the class for essays and the like.

Which class do you think I learned more from? Which teacher actually cared about whether I knew/understood the material, versus what checkboxes I needed to follow to show “completion.”

If the goal is to teach students to understand what they are doing, then do that. Don’t get obsessed with trying to stop the inevitable few from cheating, or become overly focused on only having one way to measure comprehension.

Re: CheatGPT

#50

What ChatGPT (and its cousins) expose is that the way humans have been taught in most schools - memorizing and regurgitating information - is now a commodity. What humans being to the table over ChatGPT is our ability to create new links between information, aka creativity. Teaching creativity, imo, will require a return to the methods like those of Sophocles and his contemporaries. I would rather this author be writ…

Absolutely this. Change the questions you're asking of your students. Harder to grade than option A though huh?
Post reply on HN