Earlier quoted context omitted.
Life doesn't tend to take place under exam conditions, either.
It's more about the meta-skill of learning to adapt. Learning to be uncomfortable sometimes.
And it'll make you happier in the long run.
661–670 of 672 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Life doesn't tend to take place under exam conditions, either.
It's more about the meta-skill of learning to adapt. Learning to be uncomfortable sometimes.
And it'll make you happier in the long run.
I've always though that the education system was broken and next to worthless. I've never felt that teachers ever tried to _teach_ me anything, certainly not how to think. In fact I saw most attempts at thought squashed because they didn't fit neatly into the syllabus (and so couldn't be graded). The fact that AI can do your homework should tell you how much your homework is worth. Teaching and learning are collabora…
However, you can instead recognize the difficulty and time that this would require on the part of the educator, and therefore expense to the student, and you can recognize that you have the goal of not just obtaining a piece of paper but actually learning a skill. With this mindset, it makes sense to take the initiative to treat the homework as an opportunity to learn and practice. It's is one of those things that's worth as much as you put into it. Of course, one can use their judgement to decide which homework is worth spending time on to learn the material, and which can be safely sailed through with minimum effort.
Having a skilled teacher that you can really collaborate with and who can spend the time to evaluate your skills in a personal way is of course going to lead to better learning outcomes than the traditional education system. It will also be far more expensive. Although, AI is offering something somewhat akin to this experience at a much lower price, to those who are able to moderate their usage so that they are learning from the AI instead of just offloading tasks to it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
We banned it. Yes, that's what we did and are still doing. Most grade schools don't allow calculators on basic arithmetic classes. Colleges don't integrate WolframAlpha into Calculus 101 exams. etc.
Which is extremely stupid. I want my math graduates to be skilled at using CAS systems. Yes, even in Calculus 1. The lack of computer access for teaching math which objectively is supercharged by computation is a massive disservice to millions of individuals who could have used those CAS systems. I don't want my engineers solving equations by hand. I especially don't want anyone who claims to be a "statistician" to n…
The AI tools should be helping more than hurting. But take my example: I am in 3 year long litigation with soon to be ex-wife, she recently fired her attorneys and for 2 weeks used chatGPT to write very well worded, very strong and very logically appealing motions practically almost destroying my attorney on multiple occasions and he had to work overtime costing me extra $80,000 in litigation costs. And finally once…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Remote proctoring programs at least are pretty rough these days. Their environment conditions are pretty exacting and then they expect you to just stare at the screen and think for basically the whole exam. Minor normal webcam problems can invalidate the entire exam through no fault of the examee or if you look around or fidget a lot it can trigger their cheat detection as well. I'm glad I finished my test taking tim…
What do they do if you don't have a webcam? Or if your webcam is broken? Or if you don't feel comfortable sharing your video?
Anything short of all the requirements and they do not administer the test. In the case something is broken, there is usually a window rather than a specific time when you can take the test, so you have an opportunity to resolve it.
If a webcam is required, students are informed about this requirement before enrolling in the institution, and are usually required to purchase hardware capable of doing this as a condition of enrollment.
A good start for this debate would be to reconsider the term "AI", perhaps choosing a term that's more intuitive, like "automation" or "robot assistant". It's obvious that learning to automate a task is no way to learn how to do it yourself. Nor is asking a robot to do it for you. Students need to understand that learning to write requires the mastery of multiple distinct cognitive and organizational skills, only the…
Quite relevant here (maybe not where Universities are directly concerned) is the history of Luddites breaking automated textile equipment to protest their high skilled jobs disappearing in favour of much less skilled jobs of machine operators.
Let me just say that I always like these types of conversation on here. Tech dorks and education are an interesting conversation. I'll throw in my 2 cents as a HS CS teacher. First off, I respect the author of the article for trying pen and paper, but that’s just not an option at a lot of places. The learning management systems are often tied in through auto grading with google classroom or something similar. Often y…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The bluff I'm referring to here is the measurement. The notion that an educational experience can be meaningfully measured, and that such a measurement can be guaranteed well enough to prevent uneducated people from obtaining fraudulent certification. I don't see learning as a compromise with economics. I see each as entirely irrelevant to the other. Certification is not a tool for learning; it is a tool for capitali…
Without school and tests, the majority of the people won't learn a thing. They are too dumb, selfish and lazy to do so. They need to be coerced into learning. The system may not be the rosy image you have in mind, but human nature makes it almost unavoidable. > it is a tool for capitalism All communist states had normal schools and certification. Without it, the state would collapse. We're not completely free agents,…
The problem is that measurement is treated as an end, and not a means. People will always be choosing who they are willing to work with. The problem I'm focused on here is that these systems gatekeep collaborative work behind cooperation. People don't necessarily need to work together to collaborate on work. We could collaborate on the work itself: we just aren't allowed to do that, because copyright defines derivative work as illegal.