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

Do AI detectors work? Students face false cheating accusations

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

931–940 of 1001 posts

Re: Do AI detectors work? Students face false cheating accusations

#931

Post by zelphirkalt »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #693
zelphirkalt wrote: post #320

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That will be a dystopia. If I were a student still, I would rather go to the university physically, than install spyware on my computer, that only incidentally reports to the university, but its main purpose will be collecting my personal data for some greedy commercial business. No thank you. That, or the uni shall give me a separate machine to write on, only for that purpose.

> I would rather go to the university physically, than install spyware on my computer Well yes, in-person proctored is the gold standard. For those who can’t or won’t go in person, something invasive is really the only alternative to entirely exam-based scoring.

If the university requires invasive technology, then it should of course provide their students with devices, onto which they can put their invasive stuff.

Re: Do AI detectors work? Students face false cheating accusations

#932

Post by skhunted »

underbiding wrote: post #900
skhunted wrote: post #491

I’ve been teaching in higher education for 30 years and am soon retiring. I teach math. In every math course there is massive amounts of cheating on everything that is graded that is not proctored in a classroom setting. Locking down browsers and whatnot does not prevent cheating. The only solution is to require face-to-face proctored exams and not allow students to use technology of any kind while taking the test. B…

Personal take: Education / pedagogy needs to pull itself up finally and actually learn to modernize and change the fact that its absolute core model hasn't changed for hundreds of years. Rote memorization and examinations as being the basis of modern education is the problem here, and frankly I'm glad that many academics are struggling because it should show how terrible most educational programs truly are at actuall…

I think you have very little experience teaching.

Re: Do AI detectors work? Students face false cheating accusations

#933

Post by gklitz »

jvanderbot wrote: post #394
gklitz wrote: post #330

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Written assay evaluation is not and has never been an effective evaluation. It was always a cost saving measure because allocating 30min face to face time with each individual student for each class is such a gigantic cost for the institution that they cannot even imagine doing it. Think about that the next time you look at your student debt, it couldn’t even buy you 30min time per class individually with the teacher…

Well, that's not necessarily true. I was perhaps the most importunate student ever, and lingered around my professor's offices whenever they were open. I had endless questions, off topic and on. I was curious sure, but I was also annoying and pushy and wouldn't take no for an answer. In fact, the only reason I use the word 'importunate' to describe myself, is because that's what my undergrad advisor called me. So I a…

The fact that one person can easily take a cup of water from a lake does not mean the lake supports for every person to take a cup. In fact, if everyone had tried to take that cup, then there wouldn’t even be a lake for the one person to take a cup from.

Re: Do AI detectors work? Students face false cheating accusations

#934

Post by GJim »

mrweasel wrote: post #184

The part that annoys me is that students apparently have no right to be told why the AI flagged their work. For any process where an computer is allowed to judge people, where should be a rule in place that demands that the algorithm be able explains EXACTLY why it flagged this person. Now this would effectively kill off the current AI powered solution, because they have no way of explaining, or even understanding, w…

> For any process where an computer is allowed to judge people....

GDPR to the rescue!

https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/uk-gdpr-guidance-and-re...

You must identify whether any of your processing falls under Article 22 [automated decision making, including AI] and, if so, make sure that you:

* give individuals information about the processing;

* introduce simple ways for them to request human intervention or challenge a decision;

* carry out regular checks to make sure that your systems are working as intended.

Why in gods name has the USA not adopted similar common sense legislation?

Re: Do AI detectors work? Students face false cheating accusations

#935

Post by lelandfe »

whywhywhywhy wrote: post #726
lelandfe wrote: post #5

The challenging thing is, cheating students also say they're being falsely accused. Tough times in academia right now. Cheating became free, simple, and ubiquitous overnight. Cheating services built on top of ChatGPT advertise to college students; Chrome extensions exist that just solve your homework for you.

Is it cheating if the teacher can’t tell

Yes

Re: Do AI detectors work? Students face false cheating accusations

#936

Post by adamc »

BriggyDwiggs42 wrote: post #880
adamc wrote: post #795

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The consequences of cheating could be made much more severe. I am troubled by this argument because it suggests people have no ethical core. If that is true then we are going to have problems with them regardless.

When we talk about an ethical core, that sort of behavior exists between individuals. People in a family, or people who are friends, hopefully will and typically do adjust their behavior according to some sense of ethics. When we put people into a classroom, however, we’re implicitly putting them into competition with their peers for a limited set of opportunities that determine the extent to which their basic human…

"Deserve" is a subjective and poorly defined concept. They agree to the evaluation criteria when they take the course. They are supposed to actually learn the material. Everything else in your argument is sophistry.

Re: Do AI detectors work? Students face false cheating accusations

#937

Post by adamc »

FigurativeVoid wrote: post #890
adamc wrote: post #795

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The consequences of cheating could be made much more severe. I am troubled by this argument because it suggests people have no ethical core. If that is true then we are going to have problems with them regardless.

I think if you asked people who cheat if it was ethically wrong, they would admit it cheating is indeed unethical. But we are really great about rationalizing away ethical issues. I suspect is a good grade is worth more than a personal sense of ethics. As much as a med school wants ethical students, they want students with 4.0s more.

Then we are lost. Someone willing to cheat to get good grades will cheat in many other ways.

Re: Do AI detectors work? Students face false cheating accusations

#938

Post by wrasee »

ndileas wrote: post #671
wrasee wrote: post #311

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, they’re inverted prisons.

They're designed to isolate and control everyone outside of them in order to keep the children inside safe? That is certainly an opinion.

That's not at all what i meant, but it doesn't matter.

Re: Do AI detectors work? Students face false cheating accusations

#939

Post by plewd »

jimhefferon wrote: post #891
FloorEgg wrote: post #814

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have friends that started a startup trying to tackle this problem. They actually found ways for certain types of exams in certain subjects to make cheating exponentially harder and also provide less of an advantage, so much so that if the student is cheating they are effectively learning. Some of their stuff works really well, and they have prof customers who love it. The CEO went on a tour to visit their biggest c…

Can you say more about the startups stuff?

I'm a bit surprised they talked so much about the AI startup's effectiveness without actually explaining the solution

Re: Do AI detectors work? Students face false cheating accusations

#940

Post by ckastner »

auggierose wrote: post #913
ckastner wrote: post #850

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So if an automated decision happens, and the reviewer looks for a second at it, and says, good enough, that will be OK according to GDPR. Don't see what GDPR solves here. The assumption is that a human review the conditions that led the automated system to make that decision. I think it would be trivial to argue in court that rubberstamping some scalar value that a deep neural net or whatever spit out does not pass…

Why a single score? The AI can generate a whole boilerplate of argumentation of why it made the decision. The reviewer will pretend to read and contemplate it, and then press the "OK" button.

Fair point.
Post reply on HN