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

Professor denounces mass AI fraud on an exam at Brown

english.elpais.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

681–690 of 771 posts

Re: Professor denounces mass AI fraud on an exam at Brown

#681

Post by boogieknite »

rocqua wrote: post #504
sgustard wrote: post #311

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"best not to blame the students" There are dozens for every one who didn't get the opportunity to attend an Ivy. The penalty for cheating should be automatic expulsion. I'll note as a hiring manager the college degree won't be worth shit unless the school can show their students have any integrity.

Sure, blame the people not the system. Our whole education system is setup as a skinner box for grades. People finding tricks for better grades are massively rewarded. Study methods are optimised for recall within a month. And educators are accountable only to the measured outcomes. Very little of the designed system of education is aimed at teaching. Most of it is aimed at measuring and certifying. Treating students…

You said it well and my brain automatically rephrased your comment while I was reading it:

Our whole everything is setup as a skinner box for mulah. People finding tricks for more mulah are massively rewarded. Efforts are optimized for ROI within a fraction of a second. And management are accountable only to the measured outcomes.

Re: Professor denounces mass AI fraud on an exam at Brown

#682

Post by recursive »

jyounker wrote: post #562
recursive wrote: post #510

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I learned cursive in elementary school. For me the downside is that it's a waste of time and attention that could be spent on something else.

Developing fine motor control for cursive is actually improving cerebellar function. It turns out that the cerebellum is a general "organ" for fine control and synchronization of neural function across the brain. It is implicated in: * Reading and responding to other people's emotions. * Emotional regulation. * Generalized sequencing. * Musical ability. * Counting. * Following patterns. While you may see it as a wast…

It's hard for me to imagine how fine motor control applies to cursive in a way that doesn't apply to block writing.

Re: Professor denounces mass AI fraud on an exam at Brown

#683

Post by BeetleB »

ninalanyon wrote: post #509
BeetleB wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

3 hours for us as well. When you start doing graduate level work, a problem could easily last over an hour. And many people will have false starts before they figure it out. It's not a problem with homework assignments as they have multiple days to finish. So the professor has to decide between poor data with high variance, or good data with lower variance. > I'm pretty sure that having more time would not have helpe…

Such scores were expected when I was studying. No one got 100% in the kind of exams we had, not even those who got firsts.

Sure, I know some places that do that.

The problem is that the professor has little clue on who can and can't solve the problems. Everyone doing poorly on a tightly constrained problem is mostly noise.

Re: Professor denounces mass AI fraud on an exam at Brown

#684

Post by 1vuio0pswjnm7 »

"The course, which he has been teaching for years, is not an easy one: it typically attracts few students, but very good ones. He has never had more than 30 students enrolled at a time, and on some occasions he had only eight. This semester, probably because of the new evaluation system, 86 students signed up for the class. The results of the midterm exam, which was administered on March 5, were extraordinary, with an average score of 96 out of 100. Forty students scored a perfect 100. The people who corrected the exams warned him about several irregularities. "Some answers contained unusual passages that coincided with results obtained after running the questions through ChatGPT," he says.

Serrano did not void the midterm exam, but warned students that the final one, which counted for 50% of the final grade, would be held in-person. He also said that if the grade distribution was not similar to the midterm, only the final exam would be taken into account. The average score dropped to 48 out of 100. Of the 89 students who did the midterm exam, only 59 showed up for the final one. And of the 27 who did not show up, 22 had scored a perfect 100 in the midterm exam."

Re: Professor denounces mass AI fraud on an exam at Brown

#686

Post by redsocksfan45 »

robocat wrote: post #453
kalium-xyz wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You cant type fast on them either

You mean on mechanical typewriters? It would be hard to learn to press keys slowly and avoid rollover unless using single finger typing: key travel was a long way on old typewriters.

[dead]

Re: Professor denounces mass AI fraud on an exam at Brown

#687

Post by meerita »

I’m not really convinced by the article’s claims.

Maybe the students cheated, maybe they didn’t. But the article does not seem to provide actual proof that they used AI. It mostly presents circumstantial evidence: unusually high scores, similar answers, and a later drop in performance on an in-person exam.

Re: Professor denounces mass AI fraud on an exam at Brown

#688

Post by jnwatson »

danaris wrote: post #658
jnwatson wrote: post #603

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which is literally what graduate students get paid to do. How do you think English, philosophy, or history tests get graded?

Do you think every institution of higher education has a ready supply of grad students to just throw at problems that require manpower? Or were you just assuming your experiences (large university, I'm guessing) are universal?

Yes. That's exactly what college is. If you don't have the resources to effectively individually evaluate a student's output, you shouldn't hold a graded class.

Re: Professor denounces mass AI fraud on an exam at Brown

#689

Post by nh23423fefe »

nearlyepic wrote: post #680
peterbell_nyc wrote: post #637

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem isn't the AI - it's the assessments. It used to be that shipping a large, well-researched essay with multiple citations was proof of work. Now it's proof of prompting, not learning or effort. If you want to test for memorization, you need a live test to do so. If you want to test for comprehension and understanding, require sessions with a tutoring AI and grade the level of comprehension exhibited. And th…

[flagged]

obviously you should go first
Post reply on HN