I once believed university was a shared intellectual pursuit. That faith has been obliterated
I once believed university was a shared intellectual pursuit. That faith has been obliterated
Dude, I lost that faith during my first month, decades ago.
Even worse, Robert Pirsig documents the loss in “Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance”, written (partly) about his experience as a professor in the 1960’s.
Why are students cheating?
I think a lot of the issue is that universities have become crap
This. If this guy’s thought university has been a bout anything but profit in the last 40 years, this guy was setting himself up for a rude awakening.
Yeah the push to objectify performance in education so that legislation can cut funding to what they consider underperforming, has made it something that needs to be gamed to prevent schools from losing funding since often the reason they’re underperforming is that the students and their families that they cater to have attended underfunded schools their whole lives. Giving fewer resources to those who never had any, on purpose, is classism. So if students are judged based on how well they do menial tasks and standardized tests, then it’s much easier to cheat. It’s not like they’re learning anything from those anyway so they don’t see any value in trying. And teachers have too many students to pay enough attention to actually teaching especially when now their primary job is making sure the school doesn’t lose funding.
That just means
youwe haven’t figured out how to work with generative AI in the classroom and not against it. And maybe that it’s time to ditch essays as an evaluation tool. Have to he students stand up and argue a point instead for example.Hard to do when our administrations have also drunk the job-certificate koolaid. They forcibly overload our classes with twice as many students as we can effectively teach. Essays are just about the only tools we have.
My original comment probably came off as abrasive, it’s not on each individual faculty to figure this out, it’s a collective task. What I meant with “you haven’t figured it out yet” was actually that nobody has figured it out yet.
And yes admin needs to be involved and leading this, with workshops, reflections, etc. It would be extremely short sighted of them not to. Ours thankfully is more enlightened, and that might be due to them having a team involving both philosophers and computer scientists somehow.
One approach I have personally found useful as a step is to actually involve the students in this discussion. Acknowledge to them that this thing exists now, have a frank discussion about its opportunities (speed) and perils (slop), and discuss with them how they think it should be integrated in your learning community. Like we’re all adults here, what do you guys want out of this experience?
Me when I didn’t read and comprehend the piece of writing I’m commenting on. The author literally talks about this and why essays specifically are an important tool that can’t be replaced by arguing your point in the classroom.
Im curious about the grade inflation talked about. I came out of a time were in the advanced classes it was curved both because the questions were so hard simple percentages would have no A’s but it also means a significant portion of the class would get C’s (They did not really curve down to D, F. You would have to significantly fall below the mean to get a D and I never saw someone get an F who made it to that level. I think you would have to cheat or not take it or something else extreme)
If students can cheat on writing papers, why don’t we stop using it as a learning metric? Why not use in-person, timed tests instead?
In person timed tests suffer from people under performing because of external circumstances. Also we should consider chatgpt as a tool that can be used like a calculator. If the answer to a test can be easily retrieved for a widely available tool, the test is only measuring performance that is no longer required. Where possible, ideally measuring performance is based on their skill during a larger time period regardless of the tools they might use. For example repeated in-person peer review sessions (without a specific time slot) could both improve once performance and generating evidence of performance over time while reducing effort from the staff
I would only say that a calculator always gives people the right answer. ChatGPT does not. People should not be using any of these current LLM tools to seek answers to things they don’t plan on verifying through some other source.
I fully agree!
