645
I Set A Trap To Catch Students Cheating With AI. The Result Was Deflating
(discuss.tchncs.de)
‘But there is a difference between recognising AI use and proving its use. So I tried an experiment. … I received 122 paper submissions. Of those, the Trojan horse easily identified 33 AI-generated papers. I sent these stats to all the students and gave them the opportunity to admit to using AI before they were locked into failing the class. Another 14 outed themselves. In other words, nearly 39% of the submissions were at least partially written by AI.‘
Article archived: https://web.archive.org/web/20251125225915/https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/set-trap-to-catch-students-cheating-ai_uk_691f20d1e4b00ed8a94f4c01
I think a fair argument could be that we have the wrong mix, the wrong emphasis.
For example, my kids history class focusing more about memorizing dates and names rather than the broader picture. We need history, but rote memorization of the trivia isn't that helpful. More analytical perspective about connecting events to outcomes and comparing the scenarios to one another, but I suppose that's too hard to fairly grade and so we don't like it...
Rote memorization is the lowest of four levels of learning. It's the easiest to achieve, the easiest to test, and the least useful. Guess what our entire goddamn education system has designed itself around?