Let's talk about the actual one page extract of her essay, which can be seen in the article, it is the second image. My take is, if she used AI to generate that, she didn't use a very good one. I don't think ChatGPT would make the grammar and clarity mistakes that you see in the image text. I see this: "should be exposed to many of these forms and models to strengthen understanding" - much better as "should be expose…
I don't wanna trot out "think of the children" bullshit here but it's hard for me to not notice that this trend has been happening since smartphones became normal and schools have increasingly become utterly toothless with regard to enforcing standards in education, i.e. "you need to know this shit in order to move to the next grade up." Nobody does that anymore. Just fudge the scores with extra credit or make-up assignments and send them up the chain to be a different teacher's problem next year.
> My opinion is, the only solution to this problem is to allow AI detectors to flag work, but that when a work is flagged, that flagging just triggers a face to face meeting between the student and the professor, where the student is required to show through discussion of the work that they understand it well enough to have written it.
You said it yourself in the subsequent paragraph, but if professors had this much time and energy to teach, their kids wouldn't be writing like deprecated GPT instances in the first place. We need to empower teachers and schools to fail children so they can be taught and experience consequences for lack of performance, and learn to do better. They have no reason to try because no one will hold them accountable, personally or systemically. We just let them fail and keep failing until they turn into failures of adults living in their parents basements playing Elden Ring all day and getting mad at each other over trivial bullshit on social media.