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

AI Agent Guidelines for CS336 at Stanford

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 176 posts

Re: AI Agent Guidelines for CS336 at Stanford

#81

Post by j_french »

aaaronic wrote: post #60

I'm trying something similar this semester with my course via AGENTS.md. I think this one is overly verbose and probably falls out of context windows pretty quickly, based on my experience (for me, a very terse but clear set of 30 lines performed better than providing examples and more nuanced explanations during my testing with a few models). I have included the basic "I am a student -- help me learn, don't just do…

I wish you good luck! And add that I'd be interested to hear how you get on. I intend to adopt a similar approach with my classes in September. The . history folder is a great idea.

How do you intend to assess your students?

Re: AI Agent Guidelines for CS336 at Stanford

#83

Post by bcherny »

For those using Claude Code, I recommend Learning mode to instruct Claude to walk you through implementing the solution yourself rather than doing it for you. It’s very helpful when diving into a new domain, and helps build lower level intuition.

To enable it, run /config > output styles > Learning

Re: AI Agent Guidelines for CS336 at Stanford

#84

Post by baddash »

__float wrote: post #68
baddash wrote: post #63

Even though it seems radical, I think the right approach is to simply allow the students to use AI to its full potential, to generate answers, code, whatever. The onus should be on the instructor to make sure that the student ends up actually understanding and being able to code/solve problems that they pose without using coding agents. Why? Because: 1. this is exactly what is going on in the real world. People are a…

> you can actually learn a LOT by being given the answer, if you actually care to learn. Even if you "actually care to learn", this is a huge mental shortcut and you're deceiving yourself if you think deep learning is happening from looking at the answer. On top of that, the pressures to just finish the coursework and move on to your other homework due tomorrow seems pretty high. Your suggestion means we're no longer…

Not from simply looking at the answer. From knowing the answer and reverse-engineering or understanding how to arrive at that answer in the first place. It's not always the best way of learning, but it definitely is a great way to learn if you care to actually understand why it is the answer and how you would have arrived at it.

> Your suggestion means we're no longer coddling/shielding students, but we also aren't actively helping them, are we?

My suggestion is just the former, it doesn't imply the latter.

Re: AI Agent Guidelines for CS336 at Stanford

#85

Post by j_french »

sgirard wrote: post #12

This is interesting. I don't know how the AI agent guidelines will be enforced because there will always be a model outside the curriculum that a student can use to bypass the guidelines. Encouraging academic integrity is useful but requires the student to buy into the idea that they are paying for an education, not a diploma. This is a tough problem and I have been wondering how CS departments are incorporating AI i…

I think the answer to "how will AI agent guidelines be enforced" is that they won't be because they can't be, at least not directly.

This doesn't mean that this approach doesn't have value though. I think it very much does.

One way to indirectly enforce use of the AI agent guidelines is via an oral examination where the instructor and student look over their work together and talk about it. Students who have genuinely tried to learn and used AI as a learning tool via the agent guidelines should do a lot better in an oral exam than students who have used AI as a solution generator.

I adopted the oral exam (without agent guidelines) for a course i teach in the academic year just gone, it worked pretty well. Next term I intend to include the agent guidelines to give them clearer guardrails. Still ultimately optional, but if students choose to ignore them it's gonna be pretty obvious during our conversation.

Re: AI Agent Guidelines for CS336 at Stanford

#87

Post by dogleash »

londons_explore wrote: post #71

As an employer, I want AI to be fully allowed for assignments, and the assignments to be made trickier to compensate. Let's train people to use all the tools available to solve the hardest problems, rather than solving toy problems with a slide rule.

As an employer, I want education to be robust from the ground up, not turn uni into an attempt to bootcamp whatever is hot today.

I don't think a 4 year postsecondary education is enough time to make a developer that can hit the ground running. Not if it's 100% of class time on CS theory. Nor if it were 4 years of vocational training and labwork that leaned heavy into AI. Nor some mix. We train on the job heavily, it's just not possible to fit everything into the sausage grinder.

So why not throw in some mandatory non-major electives? Take the time to do stuff that frustrates people who want uni to be a certificate mill. I don't care if green employees are experts at the exact narrow set of tools I use. I want them to be good at learning, and to have gotten most of the standard CS topics out of the way.

Re: AI Agent Guidelines for CS336 at Stanford

#88

Post by xboxnolifes »

gaiagraphia wrote: post #51
xyzal wrote: post #44

I am really baffled by the comments in the spirit of "this is unenforceable, and therefore worthless". I bet most people would not steal even if they knew they could get away with it.

Students are struggling to get work after graduating because they're dropped into a competitive environment. Ideals aren't enough to get jobs in the current environment. Universities should be places which are at the bleeding edge of development and providing society with the best new ideas/tech, etc has to offer. Junior workers should be hotbeds of exciting talent which have the ability to revolutionise industries.…

Im confused, are you suggesting students using AI to do their assignments for them and have them learn nothing will benefit them more or less in the future when they entire a competitive environment?

Re: AI Agent Guidelines for CS336 at Stanford

#89

Post by phreeza »

asdff wrote: post #79
hibikir wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

3 tests was already better than the traditional Spanish university class: 1 exam. which is probably written by the department head, not your teacher, and he isn't in any way interested in a high pass rate. Failing 90% of the class might even be positive for them. At that point classes aren't even important: You purchase the tests from the last 10 years, and then you have a prayer of knowing what the bar might be this…

I tested out of all but the last required Spanish class so I probably skipped over some early stuff and avoided the deeper stuff. But at that level I remember we'd do oral exams with the TA 1 on 1 maybe 15 mins in the hallway. I forget the logistics of it all now. I remember making presentations and class participation in spanish being important. I can't remember how the written exams went.

Pretty sure op is talking about university in Spain for other subjects, not Spanish class at university.

Re: AI Agent Guidelines for CS336 at Stanford

#90

Post by jchigg2000 »

cush wrote: post #35

This is such a realistic balance between completely banning coding agents and embracing the spirit of higher education

I agree. Learning to code from scratch today would be difficult to say the least. The scar tissue accrued from debugging a compilable typo, a misplaced comma or parenthesis teaches something that's hard to recreate - but replacing it with durable learning that won't age-out is a definite win.
Post reply on HN