Live data from Hacker News

Suspecting AI cheating, Ivy League prof ordered in-person final; scores fell 50%

arstechnica.com

21–30 of 168 posts

Re: Suspecting AI cheating, Ivy League prof ordered in-person final; scores fell 50%

#21
post #11
post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just wait a few decades until brain-machine interfaces will become a mass-market thing.

Can't wait for the EU brain control bill. We support our citizens right to free will so long as they don't think anything bad.

You jest, but I’m pretty sure it’ll be a thing somewhere, it’ll take its toll, and eventually fail from its own flaws. Then, chances are, there will be some lessons learnt - although, most likely, not on the first try. But that’s just a futuristic speculation.

My point was, however, that in modern age, where we’re literally on the verge of redefining humanity, we might be forced to redefine “cheating” as well. It’s all surely starting to slowly crack at the seams for the last half a century, and the pace is only increasing. When I was a kid, electronic calculators were banned (but not the slide rule, heh), nowadays, I’ve heard, even programmable ones are becoming accepted.

Re: Suspecting AI cheating, Ivy League prof ordered in-person final; scores fell 50%

#22
post #2

At-home testing is dead.

It is. I think the professor here was being naive, but I appreciate his optimism. When I was in college (in the 90s), take home exams allowed a knowledgeable student to really shine. I’m not saying that they weren’t eminently cheatable back then—they were—but they also had the odd side-effect that, if it was a class you cared about, the test itself could be a learning experience.

For context, I am also a faculty member at a highly selective college. I had a similar shocking realization last year that it was likely that there was widespread cheating on homework assignments, which I used to favor heavily toward their grades. To verify my suspicions, I generated custom tests for every student in the class: the exam included code from students’ own programming assignment submissions. All I asked them to do was explain what they wrote.

The class performed badly on this exam, and the results were strongly bimodal. Roughly half the class aced the exam. The other half could make neither heads nor tails out of the code. For the students who wrote things like “lol, i have no idea” (real response) I opened honor cases.

I think many faculty right now are going through the stages of grief. We all knew that even at selective institutions, cheating existed, that many students were in it for the credentials. But as long as the numbers of known cases was low, we could convince ourselves that the few doing it were outliers. When a class does it en masse, it’s more than a slap in the face; it makes you feel like a chump. Have we been fooling ourselves this entire time? Was all the time I spent becoming a subject-matter expert a waste? Are the students just rolling their eyes when I turn my back? Those thoughts hurt. I personally chose to become a faculty member because it seemed like research and teaching were the best ways to maximize my impact.

I still have some hope. After all, I still spend my days working and socializing with like-minded thinkers, some of whom are truly brilliant. And every year, a handful of students come out of the woodwork and surprise me. But it’s hard not to think that the group of people who find joy in learning and creating is shrinking.

Re: Suspecting AI cheating, Ivy League prof ordered in-person final; scores fell 50%

#23
post #3

> Ivy League college students are, by definition, intelligent. I stopped reading after the first sentence.

I’m not sure why that’s controversial - I have met many Ivy League students and grads; they are all intelligent, at least in an academic way. The only other common characteristic is that they almost always had some form of privilege. Either rich parents, or adults around them who worked very hard to get them to that level.

> I’m not sure why that’s controversial

Do you know what "by definition" means?

> I have met many Ivy League students and grads; they are all intelligent, at least in an academic way.

You probably wouldn't meet the dumb ones, because they're probaly not in your social class:

> rich parents

Re: Suspecting AI cheating, Ivy League prof ordered in-person final; scores fell 50%

#24
post #22
post #2

At-home testing is dead.

It is. I think the professor here was being naive, but I appreciate his optimism. When I was in college (in the 90s), take home exams allowed a knowledgeable student to really shine. I’m not saying that they weren’t eminently cheatable back then—they were—but they also had the odd side-effect that, if it was a class you cared about, the test itself could be a learning experience. For context, I am also a faculty memb…

But it’s hard not to think that the group of people who find joy in learning and creating is shrinking.

I'm not sure you should think it is shrinking. There are a lot of people in this world that hate to learn, and literally are incredibly apathetic about any topic. To such, learning anything is work, never a joy.

Before AI they had to learn to succeed. Now they see a shortcut. You said half showed they were learning, that's not so bad. I think you should be glad it's that high. I am.

Re: Suspecting AI cheating, Ivy League prof ordered in-person final; scores fell 50%

#25
post #13
post #3

> Ivy League college students are, by definition, intelligent. I stopped reading after the first sentence.

I agree that they are intelligent, just don't know about the "definition" part. A typical Ivy Leaguer isn't a dumbass. What's wrong with calling one intelligent? Try visiting a Walmart and interacting with literally anyone. That's the average. Let's not allow our egos to gatekeep who we consider intelligent, fellow HNians.

> just don't know about the "definition" part

Yes, that's the point.

> A typical Ivy Leaguer isn't a dumbass.

But that's not what the quoted sentence said.

> Try visiting a Walmart and interacting with literally anyone. That's the average.

I've been to Walmart. Does that make me average? (You say literally anyone.) Do you think that Ivy Leaguers never go to Walmart?

> Let's not allow our egos to gatekeep who we consider intelligent, fellow HNians.

You say this in the same paragraph where you rip on Walmart customers.

Re: Suspecting AI cheating, Ivy League prof ordered in-person final; scores fell 50%

#26
' “56 percent of undergraduate respondents [at Brown] and 67 percent of graduate and medical student respondents reported intentionally using GenAI tools daily or weekly,” '

and the rest are lying.

(With apologies to the original example of anomalous self-reporting)

Re: Suspecting AI cheating, Ivy League prof ordered in-person final; scores fell 50%

#27
This is already a clusterfuck, but it's going to be so much worse in 10 years. We're going to have an entire generation trapped in the gig economy because their education is going to be considered worthless, and even if it wasn't worthless, there won't be enough entry level jobs for anyone to get into. Senior people will age out and our entire society is just going to be hollowed out.

And people wonder why I'm an AI hater.

Re: Suspecting AI cheating, Ivy League prof ordered in-person final; scores fell 50%

#29
post #22
post #2

At-home testing is dead.

It is. I think the professor here was being naive, but I appreciate his optimism. When I was in college (in the 90s), take home exams allowed a knowledgeable student to really shine. I’m not saying that they weren’t eminently cheatable back then—they were—but they also had the odd side-effect that, if it was a class you cared about, the test itself could be a learning experience. For context, I am also a faculty memb…

For most people, college is a box to check off. And individual classes are even more so.

Re: Suspecting AI cheating, Ivy League prof ordered in-person final; scores fell 50%

#30
post #2

At-home testing is dead.

That would be good. https://www.baneproctoring.com/

I clicked expecting Bane Proctoring, where Bane monitors your exam and if he catches you cheating...
Post reply on HN