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

201–210 of 231 posts

Re: The AI zombification of universities

#201

Post by profdumpster »

stonlyb wrote: post #70

I'm a current student, who also happens to be a full-time professional who is "all in on AI", and I think most are missing the true opportunities AI opens up for education. Because my student path is non-linear (vs just following a life script), I may be a bit weird / not the average student, but it's especially true for me that I'm very intentional about actually learning the things I sign up for classes to learn. M…

your 2: This is the way to the new frontier of learning. How to use (build) AI to learn is going to become the OS every subject is going to run on inside of a few years. We may even move away from courses at that point, the way we'll move away from apps...

Re: The AI zombification of universities

#202

Post by j_w »

nradov wrote: post #145
materielle wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As recently as 2015 when I attended a middling CS program, we had in-person timed exams where we had to write down DSA implementations on a blank sheet of paper in Java. We were deducted points for trivial syntax mistakes. If these stories I keep hearing are true, then university programs have really taken a nose dive recently. This isn’t a “back in my day” thing, but within the past 5 years. The pace of the purporte…

I'm not sure I understand your comment. Surely you don't think that the details of a particular programming language's syntax are an appropriate criteria for grading an exam? That seems crazy.

Rethink it in written language:

> Surely you don't think that the details of a particular written language's syntax are an appropriate criteria for grading an exam?

Computer science is the science of computing. Programming languages are the language used to implement computer science. Therefore you would expect that students accurately use the programming language to answer questions about computing. Seems reasonable to me.

Re: The AI zombification of universities

#203

Post by nradov »

j_w wrote: post #202
nradov wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure I understand your comment. Surely you don't think that the details of a particular programming language's syntax are an appropriate criteria for grading an exam? That seems crazy.

Rethink it in written language: > Surely you don't think that the details of a particular written language's syntax are an appropriate criteria for grading an exam? Computer science is the science of computing. Programming languages are the language used to implement computer science. Therefore you would expect that students accurately use the programming language to answer questions about computing. Seems reasonable…

You don't need programming languages to implement computer science. Pseudo code suffices for exams.

Re: The AI zombification of universities

#204

Post by nradov »

aarjaneiro wrote: post #191
nradov wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure I understand your comment. Surely you don't think that the details of a particular programming language's syntax are an appropriate criteria for grading an exam? That seems crazy.

Sounds fair to me so long as students were aware going into the test that syntax would be graded

Fairness or lack thereof is not the point. Programming language syntax is trade school stuff. And I don't mean that as a slight against trade schools, but it's a different type of training.

Re: The AI zombification of universities

#205

Post by j_w »

nradov wrote: post #203
j_w wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Rethink it in written language: > Surely you don't think that the details of a particular written language's syntax are an appropriate criteria for grading an exam? Computer science is the science of computing. Programming languages are the language used to implement computer science. Therefore you would expect that students accurately use the programming language to answer questions about computing. Seems reasonable…

You don't need programming languages to implement computer science. Pseudo code suffices for exams.

You don't need programming languages to DESCRIBE computer science but to implement it you need some programming language.

Quite literally an "implementation detail."

Re: The AI zombification of universities

#206

Post by acbart »

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.

Also for deadlines and social accountability. There's a reason why there was a lot less learning during the pandemic. The simple fact that most online learning advocates don't want to acknowledge is that humans learn better from other humans in person. On average, of course.

Re: The AI zombification of universities

#207

Post by ThrowawayR2 »

ponector wrote: post #198
ThrowawayR2 wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do let us know where we can find a chemistry lab or biology lab or the facilities used for various other engineering undergraduates in a public library.

How about nuclear physics? Every undergraduate has access to the fission materials, right? Student doesn't need a specialized laboratory to learn things.

Several universities, including MIT, do have their own nuclear reactor on site for teaching and research.

Re: The AI zombification of universities

#208

Post by Yizahi »

smartmic wrote: post #69
spicyusername wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> These problems are all because of a culture that favours the measurement over what is being measured. What other kind of culture is there? A culture of not measuring?

A culture rooted in φιλοσοφία (greek, philosophia in Latin). So yes, I meant that literally. There were times, already 2500 years ago, where people wanted to study to become wiser.

Oh yeah, I can just imagine a line of people wanting to learn Strength of Materials course for fun, or anything equally crazy (requiring at the same time fresh knowledge of other hard uni courses as a prerequisite, a lot of strict rigor in studying and just pure baseline intellect to get it at all). One can learn Latin for fun, starting from literally zero and stop any arbitrary level too. One can't learn ANY hard STEP topic without doing that continuously on a progression. If god forbid you take a gap in studying STEM courses, in a decade you will have to restart from school program again :) .

PS: I get all the idealistic mulling about how universities should be these utopian centers for the voluntary knowledge study and collaboration and the only result should be merit based. But real world doesn't work like that. If a country wants to have professional chemists or say welders for example, it must force kids through a lot of boring and hard mandatory study for years. Humanity didn't invent anything better yet, sorry.

Re: The AI zombification of universities

#209

Post by Yizahi »

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.

I didn't have such experience in my local polytechnic, but my friend went to study Theoretical Physics at the best university in the country. He told me, that right at the beginning of the very first day they gathered all freshmen in a hall and their old rector came to them. He said almost literally this: "here are a hundred of you, all wanting to learn physics, but we only need one". And eventually they did have that "one", he is a top researcher somewhere in America nowadays, he told me. And my friend finished masters there, completing all the hard study, got physics diploma, aaand... went to work as an accountant (he's CFO now, got a secondary MBA later). There is really not a high demand for theoretical physicists, even internationally :) .

Re: The AI zombification of universities

#210

Post by curiousllama »

jimbokun wrote: post #164
curiousllama wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

The point was still the credentials. Otherwise what signal does “prominent family and graduated from Harvard” have over just “prominent family”?

Again - maybe?

The credential was certainly something - a more easily understood distillation of the of connections and status that got you there. But that's not exactly professional the way a degree in Business is.

Besides, were there not other high-minded notions that underpinned that credential - ideas of self-development and virtuous leadership? And more crass notions of polish and status? Were these not the self-justifications of these elites, made manifest through the institutions?

As a side note - I do strongly suspect elite schools will bring these ideas back. If not for virtue, for necessity - as schools seek to self-justify in ways that go beyond the dollars they risk losing.

Post reply on HN