Live data from Hacker News

A high schooler writes about AI tools in the classroom

theatlantic.com

161–170 of 368 posts

Re: A high schooler writes about AI tools in the classroom

#161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> external factors (abuse, addiction, sickness, etc.). Beside factors that body's performance, also consider factors that impact well-meaning parent or caregivers' _presence_ in the home, such economic realities, e.g., parents working multiple jobs, parents with challenging schedules, single parents, lack of community support (e.g., availability of a supportive neighbors or families.)

Agreed, of course. All captured in the etc. Nothwithstanding these factors, the debate still boils down to who's responsible for the kids' well-being: Them or society.

I disagree with the binary (family/society) framing because the well-being of children has always depended on overlapping responsibilities between parents, communities, and society. Not only that, but that false dichotomy also ignores children's autonomy as well.

Either way, in this debate, what really matters are outcomes- whether children thrive or not.

Re: A high schooler writes about AI tools in the classroom

#163

Unfortunately, this kind of story will continue to be a popular one in newspapers and magazines, garnering lots of clicks. It feeds into the "everything is different now" sort of desperate helplessness people seem primed to adopt with respect to AI sometimes. Obviously the answer to testing and grading is to do it in the classroom. If a computer is required, it can't connect to the internet. Caught with a cellphone,…

If substantially changing school device and testing policies is required by new technology, doesn't that mean everything is different now?

Re: A high schooler writes about AI tools in the classroom

#164

Idk this doesn’t really click for me. That first cheating example was entirely possible before GenAI (through sparknotes). And yet, we learned. Learning has always been a choice

Individually, sure. But across a population it matters what percentage of people have basic literacy and mathematical proficiency.

And I think social has showed us that most people are lazy and swayed to the easiest approach.

Ergo, making AI easy to abuse, at the cost of learning, is detrimental to societies as a whole.

Re: A high schooler writes about AI tools in the classroom

#165

It's weird. All of our attributes which we hold and value, and develop via a mix of genes and training - intelligence, but also strength, stamina, reflexes - we acquired, if you strip it all off to basics, to feed and to procreate. That's all evolution cares about. Now, we are social animals, and we grew to value these thing for their own right. Societies valued strength and bravery, as virtues, but I guess ultimatel…

I think that humans can find new frontiers to struggle on and develop mental faculties for, even if the prior frontiers are solved.

"Problem-solving" might be dead, but people today seem more skilled in categorizing and comparing things than those in the past (even if they are not particularly good at it yet). Given the quantity and diversity of information and culture that exists, it's necessary. New developments in AI reinforce this with expert-curated data sets.

Re: A high schooler writes about AI tools in the classroom

#166
Well, we can hope this is only a transitional issue. Here is why.

AI will, like previous technologies, enable some of us to become more productive. In fact, it raises the bar on productivity, since an experienced programmer can now create much more code. (An inexperienced one can create much more mess, so you might not see it in aggregate statistics).

When it comes to the classroom, we should do the same. We raise the bar so that in fact, you cannot do anything without using AI. Much as you would run out of time if you didn't have a spreadsheet in a stats course 20 years ago, or pandas 10 years ago. The new tech enables more work to get done in the form of learning more high level things, while relegating lower level things to just building blocks that can be understood in the same way we understand reference texts, ie "I've seen the principal once, and I can find it again if I get to that level of abstraction".

Teaching needs to change. Perhaps the thing to do is have an Oxford tutorial rather than traditional class. For those who didn't attend, a tutorial is basically two students and a professor in a room, talking. You can't hide. You can prepare however you like, and you should spend quite a lot of hours if you're sparring with a politics or math professor. But once you're in the room, it becomes painfully obvious if you are unprepared. This is a way to get accountability.

At the moment, we have this high school system testing that is a factory. Every test is done as a thing that is easily marked. Multiple choice, or short answer, or short essay. It encourages superficial learning when you know you can dance around the important topics and just pick up the easy points, as well as simply avoiding silly errors. You can also win by simply learning the likely questions, and aping the answers.

Have a weekly small-group session with an expert, and they can find your limits. Yes, it will cost money.

Re: A high schooler writes about AI tools in the classroom

#167
post #63
post #42

I’m an AI engineer but I think schools need a nuclear option Banish tech in schools (including cell phones) (except during comp classes) but allow it at home Ie in high school only allow paper and pencil/pen Go back to written exams (handwriting based) Be lenient on spelling and grammer Allow homework, digital tutoring AI assistants and AI only when it not primary- ie for homework not in class work Bring back oral ex…

There's another side of this. The teachers have gotten used to technology, too. They don't want to grade papers by hand anymore.

> They don't want to grade papers by hand anymore.

This is only half correct. Grading by hand isn't an issue. Reading students' handwriting is the issue. Having to read the hurried scribbling of dozens of students is a huge challenge for teachers, who were already struggling grading typed papers on a deadline.

Re: A high schooler writes about AI tools in the classroom

#168
Makes you realize how fast this has happened. This is a "get off my lawn" article by a high school senior.

It's part of the job of education to instill some common culture. (Which common culture varies, but not all that much outside political topics.) For students, questions about that culture are new issues. LLMs have digested a huge amount of existing material on it. LLMs are thus really good at things students are graded upon.

This gives students the impression that LLMs are very smart. Which probably says more about educational practice than LLMs. The big problem is not cheating. It's that the areas schools cover are ones where LLMs are really good.

There's no easy fix for this.

Re: A high schooler writes about AI tools in the classroom

#169
post #163

Unfortunately, this kind of story will continue to be a popular one in newspapers and magazines, garnering lots of clicks. It feeds into the "everything is different now" sort of desperate helplessness people seem primed to adopt with respect to AI sometimes. Obviously the answer to testing and grading is to do it in the classroom. If a computer is required, it can't connect to the internet. Caught with a cellphone,…

If substantially changing school device and testing policies is required by new technology, doesn't that mean everything is different now?

As far as I can remember phones were not allowed in class and testing was generally done on paper. College was a lot more lax about this stuff than K-12 was. But colleges could and should proctor their exams more strictly.

Re: A high schooler writes about AI tools in the classroom

#170
Someone I know (not SWIM, it actually wasn't me) did a little bit of work for a high-school-level tutoring company. The company got all their leads from TikTok. They did numbers on TikTok.

The company was tutoring English Literature as one of its subjects.

They were generating English Literature exam problems - for their users - using the ChatGPT web UI.

They would upload the marking spec, and say: "Give me an excerpt from something that might be on this syllabus, and an appropriate question about it".

Naturally, their users - the high school students - were getting, often, hallucinated excerpts from hallucinated works by existing authors.

I think the kids will be fine - it'll be their world, at some point, and that world will look a lot different to now. Maybe that's too optimistic!

I would hope, in that world, LLM literacy amongst adults has increased.

Because I feel really, really bad for all the kids who are beating themselves up about getting badly marked by ChatGPT (I assume) on an imaginary excerpt of an imaginary Wordsworth poem by their functionally imaginary tutor.

It makes me laugh, and reminds me of one of my favourite jokes, about the inflatable boy who - being of a rebellious nature - takes a safety pin to the inflatable school. Chaos ensues. Afterwards, the inflatable boy's inflatable teacher says:

"You've let me down; you've let the school down, but worst of all, you've let yourself down."

I guess I'm suspicious of the linked article. Call me full of hot air, but is it actually a safety pin? Or is it just designed to look really good on an application for an inflatable college?

Post reply on HN