31–40 of 101 posts
> If a machine can do this assignment perfectly, why are you giving it to this student? By that logic now that text to speech has gotten quite good we should stop teaching kids to read.
Most western countries have somehow decided over the last couple decades that small negative actions should mostly be free of negative consequences. You can cheat on tests, shoplift in stores, and pretty much nothing will happen to you. When teachers can’t give failing grades to students or kick them out of their class for blatantly breaking the rules, this is what happens. Meanwhile I took a language exam in Japan l…
just curious - if they went through the process of providing sealable bags and (I assume) verifying the bags were in fact sealed - why not go one step further and require the sealed phones to all be placed in a bucket which could then be taken to another room to ensure no access, and also no interruptions during the exam from a rogue ring or alarm?
> the system loses legitimacy, defection becomes the dominant strategy. Almost every sentence of this piece is a very powerful reminder that we're not really talking about education vs cheating and it's actually about real work vs optics, appearances vs reality, fake news vs information, and all the rest at the same time. A certain amount of bullshit is and always has been standard, and you see it in all kinds of fol…
This is Idiocracy in the making.
> the system loses legitimacy, defection becomes the dominant strategy. Almost every sentence of this piece is a very powerful reminder that we're not really talking about education vs cheating and it's actually about real work vs optics, appearances vs reality, fake news vs information, and all the rest at the same time. A certain amount of bullshit is and always has been standard, and you see it in all kinds of fol…
In the Good Old Days, part of the role of a good education was to set oneself up to join influential social groups. These groups contained smart, interesting, learned people. They tacitly or overtly selected new members based on how smart, interesting, and learned they were. You can get the grades but remain excluded if your interviewer at Oxford or Harvard thinks you are boring, or the chaps at the Worcesthampton Natural History Club think you’re an uncouth moron, or the managing partner at Wasper & Vanderson LLP doesn’t find you engaging enough. It’s not just these posh elite groups either. Hacker cliques, artists communes, and the like have always focused on cultivating an elite membership on some axis or other through exclusivity that rewarded interestingness.
What is the equivalent nowadays? Are these groups being taken over by fakers who are constantly all pretending to each other, to the extent that the entire ranks fill up with people who can’t spell competence without a computer? If someone makes an interesting remark about a poet or artwork or engineering practice does everyone else excuse themselves for a bathroom break in order to open up Wikipedia and find something interesting to say in response?
Do they actively reward fakers, seeking out their ilk to the point that the most influential groups are the ones filled with the best self-promotion soloists? Or perhaps the whole ideal of influential social groups is just going to disappear?
First of all, the entire post reads like it was written by AI. Secondly, the author / prompter misses the point entirely with this closing paragraph: > The next time a teacher complains about AI cheating, ask: If a machine can do this assignment perfectly, why are you giving it to this student?And then we can replace it with education and work that actually matters. You learn fundamentals because they are necessary f…
You know, back in the day, teachers used to try and convey the "why" behind things like writing essays and reading books. Spark notes existed, but a good teacher could convey, hey, there is a reason we are doing this thing, it is because it has value outside the note that says you completed the task itself.
Back in the day when teachers’ salary can support a family I bet
Why not just let it be survival of the fittest? Those who are lazy will continue to be lazy. Those who are determined will continue to be determined. We don't need to help everyone, especially those who don't want to help themselves. If they want to suffer financially in the future because they are being lazy now, oh well, it can't be helped.