Nitter link, in case anyone else is hitting a login barrier: https://nitter.net/rustykitty_/status/1709316764868153537
"You have a 27% 'AI' issue in here"
11–20 of 266 posts
Re: "You have a 27% 'AI' issue in here"
#12AI Detection services are the oiliest of snake oils. Seems like education is going to need to change drastically in the next few years. Maybe we'll go all the way back to oral examinations again.
I doubt oral examinations come back in general. The undergrad model relys on massive classes, I don’t see how you can do oral exams in those 300 person classes without massive cheating as the first students tell everyone else what to expect.
I feel like a 5-minute conversation, not a pre-determined list of oral questions, on most non-hard science topics would be enough to evaluate a student. You could even have an LLM grade it as a second opinion.
Re: "You have a 27% 'AI' issue in here"
#13Earlier quoted context omitted.
I doubt oral examinations come back in general. The undergrad model relys on massive classes, I don’t see how you can do oral exams in those 300 person classes without massive cheating as the first students tell everyone else what to expect.
Use ChatGPT to write and administer 300 personalized oral exams.
The issue with different exams for each students is that it’s next to impossible to make them equally difficult which ruins the curve.
Re: "You have a 27% 'AI' issue in here"
#14AI Detection services are the oiliest of snake oils. Seems like education is going to need to change drastically in the next few years. Maybe we'll go all the way back to oral examinations again.
I doubt oral examinations come back in general. The undergrad model relys on massive classes, I don’t see how you can do oral exams in those 300 person classes without massive cheating as the first students tell everyone else what to expect.
Furthermore oral examinations do not scale. We had to do them during covid times and it was gruesome, spending full days in meetings and losing a full week with only 70-80 students.
Re: "You have a 27% 'AI' issue in here"
#15I am an Eagle Scout and was awarded it in 1995. As part of that process, I had to write up a detailed document outlining my project including how it was conceived, the work, and the outcome. It was rejected on my initial submission because the reviewers felt I it wasn’t written by a sophomore in HS. My parents rewrote the entire thing in what they described as “baby talk” and it was then accepted. The irony is not lo…
Sounds like that troop had bigger issues.
If they don't trust an Eagle candidate's attestation of authorship, they probably shouldn't have let (or been the ones to let) the candidate progress that far.
Re: "You have a 27% 'AI' issue in here"
#16When I was in college, they were going to put carpet in the science labs, and a few of us thought it was a really stupid, dangerous idea.
We started a petition and asked for signatures at the on-campus cafe.
After a few days, the administrators asked us into their office for a chat. They asked us stupid questions and tried to talk us out of our petition. When it didn't work, they eventually caved and didn't do the carpet that year.
They waited for the next year. Then a couple years later, they put back the tile.
I don't know why they were so scared of our petition, but I'm sure this is another situation that could benefit from one. It sends a very clear message about the situation to people very high up in the food chain. And I'm sure it could get a ton of signatures.
Re: "You have a 27% 'AI' issue in here"
#17AI Detection services are the oiliest of snake oils. Seems like education is going to need to change drastically in the next few years. Maybe we'll go all the way back to oral examinations again.
Students should have the right to be shown exactly where and why texts are flagged. Much of the snake oil will disappear pretty quickly if the solutions are required to provide any form of proof.
It's would be funny, if it also wasn't so sad, that the point is that the students need to prove that they did the work, while shitty software can flag their work as being plagiarism or AI generated while providing no proof.
Re: "You have a 27% 'AI' issue in here"
#18If you submit a word document, is there some way to detect if the words were typed out, how long the document was open etc? Basically trying to detect if the student pasted the text? Obviously students would get around this simply by typing it out word for word, but could work here.
Re: "You have a 27% 'AI' issue in here"
#19AI Detection services are the oiliest of snake oils. Seems like education is going to need to change drastically in the next few years. Maybe we'll go all the way back to oral examinations again.
I doubt oral examinations come back in general. The undergrad model relys on massive classes, I don’t see how you can do oral exams in those 300 person classes without massive cheating as the first students tell everyone else what to expect.
Is there any value to those lectures, nowadays? I can see a PhD lecture on the fundamentals of virtually any academic topic, for free and at my leisure, on youtube and similar sites. Waking up at 8am to attend an in-person Geology 117 lecture with 300 other freshmen is probably as outdated as a fax machine. Perhaps the next step is, education that isn't based on personal instruction isn't rare enough to be worth paying for.
Re: "You have a 27% 'AI' issue in here"
#20Earlier quoted context omitted.
I doubt oral examinations come back in general. The undergrad model relys on massive classes, I don’t see how you can do oral exams in those 300 person classes without massive cheating as the first students tell everyone else what to expect.
Furthermore oral examinations do not scale. We had to do them during covid times and it was gruesome, spending full days in meetings and losing a full week with only 70-80 students.
What about a voiced AI chatbot to handle the simpler questions?
Fight fire with fire.