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

The AI zombification of universities

thenewcritic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 231 posts

Re: The AI zombification of universities

#151

Post by rknatty »

j45 wrote: post #141
Lerc wrote: post #51

If people attend university for certification instead of education I think the battle is already lost. AI is an easy, but possibly high risk approach to gaining the certification without work, but the tried and tested approach is doing the bare minimum, cramming, then forgetting everything after graduation. If you penalize people who use AI but in the process have learned the required information you make the problem…

More and more colleges are saying they will cancel your degrees if they retroactively detect AI cheating. This will be hysterical. AI isn't the issue as much how AI is used. Passive use of any tech, including social media, and now AI is lazy and has poor outcomes. Aligning AI use with the goals of all sides, and not just one side getting paid, or just one side graduating could look different. Most people attend highe…

It is very difficult for them to prove the allegation of AI cheating. If you didn't cheat, you should fight. You have legal rights, and you don't have to roll over. I represent students who have been unfairly accused of AI cheating. Properly defended, it is not that easy for the school to win.

Re: The AI zombification of universities

#152

Post by nradov »

raincole wrote: post #26
A_D_E_P_T wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The prose is a bit too purple and tortured for that, IMO. Stock Opus 4.7 or 5.5 Pro is a more disciplined writer. And, anyway, the point the article is trying to make is obvious. What's absolutely not obvious, and what it sheds very little light on, is what the University is going to look like in 10 years. Not what it should look like, but what it is most likely to look like.

> what the University is going to look like in 10 years Mostly like they look like now, probably. With slightly more strictly enforced rules around exam. I fail to see why it won't be like that.

You may be right. But that will mean the university becomes increasingly irrelevant and disconnected from the reality that students experience after they graduate.

Re: The AI zombification of universities

#153

Post by bloppe »

Back in my day, we did the learning in class, and the evaluation (homework, projects, but sometimes even exams) at home. Seems like AI just flips the script. Now, you can learn anything you want with a private tutor. The teacher can just upload the entire course material to a place where the LLM can rag over it and answer anybody's questions. Learn it on your own time. Then, use class time for evaluation. Do the "homework" in class. Take proctored tests without access to the internet, etc.

Re: The AI zombification of universities

#154

Post by bawolff »

nradov wrote: post #112
bawolff wrote: post #92

It does feel like there is an easy solution to this: Have tests. Supervise said tests to make sure people don't cheat. That's how it worked when i was in university. Admittedly maybe that is easier in the sciences than humanities, but still, it seems doable. Cheating isn't a new phenomenon it just got cheaper and easier.

OK but why? That will reward students who are good at taking exams, which has very little relevance to being a competent worker or well-rounded citizen or innovative leader or anything else that we need.

Since when has university ever been about "being a competent worker or well-rounded citizen or innovative leader"

Re: The AI zombification of universities

#155

Post by curiousllama »

jimbokun wrote: post #105
curiousllama wrote: post #37

Over a decade ago, my orientation at UChicago included the traditional "Aims of Education" address. They packed the whole first-year class into the chapel to explain, at length, that this education will not be "useful." You're not supposed to make more money, or be happier, or really become anything other than a better version of yourself. I wonder if they still do this.

Surely some better versions of yourself would make more money or be happier?

Maybe - to your point, if we think of happiness as like “living one’s own purpose fully”, then yes, it does very directly.

But I was referring to happiness more generally as enjoyment, joy, satisfaction - that type of thing.

And in that case - there are plenty of ways being better = less happy. Eg if I were to sacrifice myself to save my family, then that’s the best version of me, but I’d be pretty dang unhappy about it.

Re: The AI zombification of universities

#156

Post by curiousllama »

jimbokun wrote: post #107
curiousllama wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Expanding this thought... UChicago should be pretty uniquely positioned to address the problem of AI writ large. They already require a full year of each philosophy, literature, and history (all through primary sources). This "Core" should already be fairly AI-proof, given they are primarily small-group, discussion-driven courses; oral exams, in-class essays, or even graded discussions should be straightforward adapt…

If the signal to corporations disappears the wage premium to a college education disappears and the students disappear along with the tuition paying the professors’ salaries.

Maybe? Elite colleges have been around a lot longer than the professional credentialism of the last 20 years, no?

Re: The AI zombification of universities

#157

Post by paulorlando »

technothrasher wrote: post #83
paulorlando wrote: post #42

Profs can push back on this if they want. Not all of them want to (or want to justify pushback given their pay). For me when I teach, no laptops or phones in class along with in-class handwritten paper quizzes on course readings and concepts has helped a lot.

Clearly not all of them want to do so. My son just finished up his freshman year at college. A couple months ago he called me and told me about an interaction he had with his English composition professor. She asked the class how they were integrating AI into their writing process. When she got to him, he said he didn't use AI, as he wanted to use the assignments to learn to write better. Her response was, "Well, you…

That is fascinating to me. Especially in English composition. The flip side is if it's an adjunct prof making $4k per class (English typically pays poorly) then she's doing the hourly rate calculation and thinking that AI is going to help her with the students. So, a potential solution to this is for the universities to have the willingness to pay their professors and ask for no AI (at least in this type of class) in exchange.

Re: The AI zombification of universities

#158

Post by senexox »

Esophagus4 wrote: post #124
sheept wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For US undergrad, with all the resources available online, going to university just for education doesn't justify the high tuition. Research is mostly limited to graduate school anyways.

The course material isn’t really what your undergrad tuition pays for. You’re paying to be surrounded by smart kids that will ensmarten you too and for access to the school’s career networks.

This is not at all what most students go to undergrad for.

For some reason in discussions like this, things are always framed as if everyone is going to Yale.

Everyone I know including myself, went to college because that is just what you were supposed to do. That was my mom's dream for me to get a degree and I didn't want to disappoint my mom.

I am sure there were really smart kids in my high school that were figuring out post graduate network strategy but that was hardly the majority.

I even had a friend that dropped out of high school that ended up going to community college. He wasn't exactly figuring out the eigenvector centrality of the nodes of his general studies classmates.

Re: The AI zombification of universities

#159

Post by senexox »

coolThingsFirst wrote: post #109
kaladin-jasnah wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This selects for people who excel at taking tests. Sure, there may not be a better alternative, but as an empirical measure I learned just about nothing in my test heavy college courses, as I was incentivized to cram for the exams and purged everything immediately after the final (and midterm).

Yes because a linear algebra exam tests your test taking skills as opposed your math ones.

[flagged]

Re: The AI zombification of universities

#160

Post by gus_massa »

j45 wrote: post #141
Lerc wrote: post #51

If people attend university for certification instead of education I think the battle is already lost. AI is an easy, but possibly high risk approach to gaining the certification without work, but the tried and tested approach is doing the bare minimum, cramming, then forgetting everything after graduation. If you penalize people who use AI but in the process have learned the required information you make the problem…

More and more colleges are saying they will cancel your degrees if they retroactively detect AI cheating. This will be hysterical. AI isn't the issue as much how AI is used. Passive use of any tech, including social media, and now AI is lazy and has poor outcomes. Aligning AI use with the goals of all sides, and not just one side getting paid, or just one side graduating could look different. Most people attend highe…

You mean the same colleges that used AI proctoring during 2020 that had a lot of horror stories of false positives, like a guy passing in a window in the back of the student or another student that was not looking 100% of the time to the screen?
Post reply on HN