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

AI Agent Guidelines for CS336 at Stanford

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 176 posts

Re: AI Agent Guidelines for CS336 at Stanford

#31

Post by jastanton »

ritzaco wrote: post #13

yeah I don't think that's going to work - it would be kind of like "we're releasing model answers to all assignments but please only use them as a teaching aid and don't copy from them" best to a) adapt assignments so that agents are bad at producing solutions b) have more scenarios where students have to do things in controlled environments. Universities managed to adapt to 'any solution you need is readily availabl…

I agree it's not a complete solution. But as those don't exist as a society we are looking for a step function in the right direction. and IMO this is one such step. You may disagree that it's not a very large step, but I would argue it's still in the right direction therefore it is neccesary, especially in education space, and I'm happy to see someone publishing at attempt.

Re: AI Agent Guidelines for CS336 at Stanford

#32

Post by gaiagraphia »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #14
xiaoyu2006 wrote: post #3

I always wonder why there is such course. Using agent ai coding tool is trivial.

When calorie dense food and gas powered vehicles came on the scene, humans (generally) got fat and out of shape. "Why eat that salad and go for a run?" one might say, "This cheesecake tastes much better and I can just drive wherever I want to go." Getting fat is one thing, but getting stupid is another, and I really fear for the future of humanity when it becomes so easy to sidestep the processes that let us actually…

There's different skills at play, and they're both as valuable as each other.

They shouldn't be thrown into a big soup with shaky aims.

We still - as a society - manage to have PE and driving as different subjects. The same can equally apply here.

Re: AI Agent Guidelines for CS336 at Stanford

#34

Post by asdff »

earthnail wrote: post #25
sgirard wrote: post #12

This is interesting. I don't know how the AI agent guidelines will be enforced because there will always be a model outside the curriculum that a student can use to bypass the guidelines. Encouraging academic integrity is useful but requires the student to buy into the idea that they are paying for an education, not a diploma. This is a tough problem and I have been wondering how CS departments are incorporating AI i…

Stanford has an honour code. Meant no oversight even during exams. Worked surprisingly well when I was there. The flipside is, if you’re ever caught cheating, there are no second chances. I imagine this applies here, too, if they want to enforce it strictly.

>Worked surprisingly well when I was there.

How could you tell? I proctored. People cheat pretty frequently and other students are none the wiser. It really takes like 4 proctors if you want to do it right. Even then I'm sure the clever ones are slipping through. These were scantron though. Short response/essay format you'd be screwed if you didn't know your stuff.

Re: AI Agent Guidelines for CS336 at Stanford

#36

Post by henry2023 »

earthnail wrote: post #25
sgirard wrote: post #12

This is interesting. I don't know how the AI agent guidelines will be enforced because there will always be a model outside the curriculum that a student can use to bypass the guidelines. Encouraging academic integrity is useful but requires the student to buy into the idea that they are paying for an education, not a diploma. This is a tough problem and I have been wondering how CS departments are incorporating AI i…

Stanford has an honour code. Meant no oversight even during exams. Worked surprisingly well when I was there. The flipside is, if you’re ever caught cheating, there are no second chances. I imagine this applies here, too, if they want to enforce it strictly.

Marc Tessier-Lavigne was Stanford's president from 2016 to 2023. Not sure if the honor code means anything nowadays.

Re: AI Agent Guidelines for CS336 at Stanford

#37

Post by asdff »

ohmahjong wrote: post #5

This seems somewhat sensible to me - the genie _is_ out of the bottle, and students absolutely will use AI agents to finish assignments without learning a thing, but there is some value to showing how agents can be used as teaching tools and what healthy use _can_ look like

Same issue as with cliffnotes. Easy way out means the easy way will be taken. Unless, you actually design a decent assignment or exam. In person essays or exams, heavily weighted, you are simply screwed if you didn't study the old fashioned way. A couple of my more serious classes were like this: no homework, no projects, entire grade based on 3 exams. That put the fear of whatever diety you subscribe to into you like nothing else to study hard and not fall behind. One bad exam you can't really come back from. Better luck next year when you retake it. Or, you dig in like hell.

Re: AI Agent Guidelines for CS336 at Stanford

#40

Post by chalupa-supreme »

gaiagraphia wrote: post #29

Is this all an elite educational institution with about $50bil in assets could muster, lol? This is completely and utterly unenforceable, and such, worthless. There really needs to be diversity in delivery styles for different modules of courses according to their aims, with 'ai access' as a key variable. If AI is allowed, it should be based on $x of usage/student, with an audit trail to prove no external funding was…

I don’t really know why this is getting downvoted. It’s clear that higher education is degrading because of easy to reach AI solutions that have no type of penalties for use.

During my undergrad it was normal to see people refer to Chegg solutions to get their answers, or as a friend for theirs.

Maybe there’s a reason my first CS professor wrote out Java code with pencil and paper I guess.

Post reply on HN