Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

"You have a 27% 'AI' issue in here"

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 266 posts

Re: "You have a 27% 'AI' issue in here"

#151

Post by Delk »

csours wrote: post #133

It feels more and more like we need to rethink what scoring schoolwork means. Worksheets and exams can show how familiar you are with the material, or they can be gamed or useless in some other way. But the best they can ever do is show familiarity. What I really want as a consumer of someone's grade or academic history is how well they WORK in the subject area, along with how well they work with other people, not ju…

> I feel cheated by my school years, because I was led to believe that regurgitation of facts is very important.

Which school is that?

I guess that's probably true of primary or middle / lower secondary school, but I don't feel like regurgitation of facts was particularly endorsed in my experience at upper secondary level, let alone at university level.

There might of course be quite a bit of variation between countries, schools and even individual teachers in this.

Re: "You have a 27% 'AI' issue in here"

#152

Post by dan-robertson »

xena wrote: post #149
slaymaker1907 wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're right about oral examinations, but written _proctored_ exams would also solve a lot of these problems, particularly if you require it to be handwritten. Having take home essays be handwritten would also help deter using AI by making it much more inconvenient to use compared to just doing the assignment in the first place.

The kids have already made workarounds: https://youtube.com/shorts/Xt0VjT_zLZE

How are they taking that thing into a written proctored examination?

Re: "You have a 27% 'AI' issue in here"

#153

Post by htag »

dsalzman wrote: post #50

Should bring back in class writing essay tests on paper. One page long. Incentive critical thinking not page length.

That's a valid way of testing a student's knowledge. I do think that tests somewhat different skills and knowledge than the 20+ hours I would spend on large undergraduate essays. Most critically, the longer format probably is better at training students to get published in academic journals.

Re: "You have a 27% 'AI' issue in here"

#154

Post by sdfghswe »

esafak wrote: post #150
sdfghswe wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If such a lawsuit was successful, wouldn't all professors have the incentive to just pass everyone with top grades, lest someone decide to sue them for "interfering with employment"?

They do have that incentive. https://www.gradeinflation.com/

Ok, wouldn't it INCREASE it then?

Fuck, I have to spell out every detail.

Re: "You have a 27% 'AI' issue in here"

#155

Post by Negitivefrags »

arcticfox wrote: post #12
HDThoreaun wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I doubt oral examinations come back in general. The undergrad model relys on massive classes, I don’t see how you can do oral exams in those 300 person classes without massive cheating as the first students tell everyone else what to expect.

I feel like a 5-minute conversation, not a pre-determined list of oral questions, on most non-hard science topics would be enough to evaluate a student. You could even have an LLM grade it as a second opinion.

I am starting a private high school and this is exactly how we plan to assess students.

Not the LLM part though.

Not only do you get a good sense of what they know, but you get a chance to give real individual feedback about what they need to focus on next.

Of course towards the end in order to get a qualification that a university will accept as entrance we will need to teach the kids to pass the standardised tests too.

Re: "You have a 27% 'AI' issue in here"

#156

Post by buggy6257 »

pmarreck wrote: post #74

I have always spelled really well (almost won a spelling bee) and as soon as personal computers became a thing, I realized how useless a "superpower" it was. And now it might become an actual liability as nearly perfect spelling/grammar is an easy attribute to hang "possibly AI-generated" on.

If perfect spelling/grammar was so easy to have the moment "personal computers became a thing", then why do my eyes bleed trying to read what people write online every day? We've had near-flawless spellcheck for years now. I think maybe it's not as much of a useless skill as you think it might be...

Re: "You have a 27% 'AI' issue in here"

#157

Post by Negitivefrags »

petemir wrote: post #14
HDThoreaun wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I doubt oral examinations come back in general. The undergrad model relys on massive classes, I don’t see how you can do oral exams in those 300 person classes without massive cheating as the first students tell everyone else what to expect.

Furthermore oral examinations do not scale. We had to do them during covid times and it was gruesome, spending full days in meetings and losing a full week with only 70-80 students.

Education just doesn’t really scale.

There haven’t been technological advances in education that have overwhelmed the student teacher ratio in terms of effectiveness.

On some level we just have to accept this.

Re: "You have a 27% 'AI' issue in here"

#158

Post by htag »

seanoliver wrote: post #65

What is the actual problem with AI generated text in and of itself? If it was completely AI generated without any human intervention, it likely would have been fairly generic / poor writing anyway. At least for the time being, AI is a new tool at our disposal but it's still just a tool, like a calculator or a hammer. Students should be judged on the merit of the work even if some of the work is AI generated.

The biggest problem I see is that learning usually requires effort/work and AI requires students to do less effort/work to achieve the same output. So the worry is that the quality of education received will decrease.

Example: no one cares that you wrote 5 pages on To Kill a Mocking Bird. They care that you read the book and thought critically about it. AI allows students to skip the reading and critical thinking portion, which is the most important part.

Re: "You have a 27% 'AI' issue in here"

#159

Post by vkou »

Delk wrote: post #151
csours wrote: post #133

It feels more and more like we need to rethink what scoring schoolwork means. Worksheets and exams can show how familiar you are with the material, or they can be gamed or useless in some other way. But the best they can ever do is show familiarity. What I really want as a consumer of someone's grade or academic history is how well they WORK in the subject area, along with how well they work with other people, not ju…

> I feel cheated by my school years, because I was led to believe that regurgitation of facts is very important. Which school is that? I guess that's probably true of primary or middle / lower secondary school, but I don't feel like regurgitation of facts was particularly endorsed in my experience at upper secondary level, let alone at university level. There might of course be quite a bit of variation between countr…

> but I don't feel like regurgitation of facts was particularly endorsed in my experience at upper secondary level,

In my high school experience, most classes could be aced through rote regurgitation of facts.

Math class required another step - identification of which category of problem you have, and rote application of one of a few pre-calc/calc algorithms.

Re: "You have a 27% 'AI' issue in here"

#160

Post by rightbyte »

xena wrote: post #149
slaymaker1907 wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're right about oral examinations, but written _proctored_ exams would also solve a lot of these problems, particularly if you require it to be handwritten. Having take home essays be handwritten would also help deter using AI by making it much more inconvenient to use compared to just doing the assignment in the first place.

The kids have already made workarounds: https://youtube.com/shorts/Xt0VjT_zLZE

Does not seem very subtle? "Proctored" means supervised.
Post reply on HN