This is an easy to solve problem: oral exams / interview exams.
Rough when you have 200 students.
Inside the university AI cheating crisis
31–40 of 113 posts
Re: Inside the university AI cheating crisis
#32Earlier quoted context omitted.
More likely that they used something like quillbot or grammarly for automatic paraphrasing.
This was about 15 years ago
grammarly is pretty old, Not sure when it became available, but it was already pretty well established as a high quality writing assistant by ~2012.
It had various tools and heuristicsv to suggest different phrasings and better words that were pretty incredible if compared to anything else back then
Re: Inside the university AI cheating crisis
#33> “What if I’m doing an MA, or in a job, and everyone got there just by cheating…” This is absolutely the problem here. The work is done, the answers are right, the report is the best anyone has seen, but oh no a fancy new tool was involved so its CHEATING! This is so friggin stupid. When i get my work done I am responsible that it comes out right. When its right, thats just it. - it's right. No matter how i got ther…
Why do we teach kids how to do basic arithmetic by hand? After all, calculators are basically ubiquitous at this point. Why waste the time teaching a skill that's not necessary as an adult? The reason is because doing arithmetic by hand teaches kids how math actually works, while using a calculator just teaches them how to find the answer. This base-level understanding is crucial for understanding more advanced math.…
> Why do we teach kids how to do basic arithmetic by hand?
I think kids waste way too much time doing hard arithmetic by hand. As a particularly egregious example, I visited a Montessori primary school where they demonstrated what is essentially a complex single player board game, for calculating square roots by hand. It's a process whereby a 5th grader would take ~10 minutes to calculate the root of a 3 digit number, by moving dozens of pins around. It looked so silly, and while other Montessori equipment offers geometrical intuition, this one seemed to offer none. Squaring with trial and error would have been so much easier.
Other more typical examples are of kids spending hundreds of hours practicing long multiplication and long division of e.g. 4 digits, and then getting punished and stressed out about having made silly mistakes. While in the real world, no one in their right mind would choose to perform these calculations by hand any more, and would instead use a tool incapable of making arithmetic mistakes.
I don't have a clear solution, but would tend towards an educational system that teaches only the very basics of performing each mathematical operation (probably up to the level the average literate adult would do mentally), and then focus the rest of the time on problems where the students are the ones posing the question, using a calculator/computer to solve it, and then check whether the answer makes sense in the original context.
EDIT: For those curious about it, I just found a blog post demonstrating the logic behind this square root peg board. The author of the blog argues that it does help build understanding, but from what I saw, I would politely disagree.
https://borisreitman.medium.com/square-roots-the-montessori-...
Re: Inside the university AI cheating crisis
#34We need validation of GPT detection tool accuracy (false/true & negative/positive), and in what circumstances, or they are useless. Without independent information about whether something is GPT-written [1], there is no way to verify it, so they can't be verified on submitted student papers where the info is from people (students) with very strong incentives to lie (not wanting to be caught).
Here are a couple references in the article, but I would like to see a review of this question:
> Researchers at the University of Reading recently conducted a blind test in which ChatGPT-written answers were submitted through the university’s own examination system: 94% of the AI submissions went undetected and received higher scores than those submitted by the humans.
> One study at Stanford found that a number of AI detectors have a bias towards non-English speakers, flagging their work 61% of the time, as opposed to 5% of native English speakers (Turnitin was not part of this particular study).
[1] That needs to be defined: Every word? mostly? GPT-written then edited? What about ideas from the humans and writing by GPT? First draft by human and editing by GPT - what about using it as a grammar checker? For suggestions on clarifying some tricky passages? ?
Re: Inside the university AI cheating crisis
#35This is an easy to solve problem: oral exams / interview exams.
That's how grad degrees are done. But there's simply not enough time to do this at an undergrad level with potentially hundreds of students.
Unless... You have an AI listening and evaluating their oral exam.
I know it sounds like a farce. Because it is. But it might also be a proper solution.
Re: Inside the university AI cheating crisis
#36This is an easy to solve problem: oral exams / interview exams.
Or just regular written exams.
Re: Inside the university AI cheating crisis
#37Re: Inside the university AI cheating crisis
#38> “What if I’m doing an MA, or in a job, and everyone got there just by cheating…” This is absolutely the problem here. The work is done, the answers are right, the report is the best anyone has seen, but oh no a fancy new tool was involved so its CHEATING! This is so friggin stupid. When i get my work done I am responsible that it comes out right. When its right, thats just it. - it's right. No matter how i got ther…
But this was always the case. When I was studying chemical engineering, it was an open secret that all the students were cheating. There was a giant google drive with all the solutions manuals, old tests, old programs, lab reports, whatever you wanted.
That's why pencil and paper tests were worth 80% of the grade.
Re: Inside the university AI cheating crisis
#39Prompts need to be integrated into grading/eval of where students are mentally. Like - cite/attach your prompts to the paper, code, whatever.
Re: Inside the university AI cheating crisis
#40I am enormously glad I went to college before these tools existed. I don't know how I would handle myself with access to them.
It depends on your goal: Do you just need that piece of paper with your name on it? Or are you going to school to really learn material?
You also know that you probably shouldn't eat that extra cookie and yet...