←back to thread

427 points JumpCrisscross | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
lwhi ◴[] No.41901852[source]
It is no longer effective to solely use a written essay to measure how deeply a student comprehends a subject.

AI is here to stay; new methods should be used to assess student performance.

I remember being told at school, that we weren't allowed to use calculators in exams. The line provided by teachers was that we could never rely on having a calculator when we need it most—obviously there's irony associated with having 'calculators' in our pockets 24/7 now.

We need to accept that the world has changed; I only hope that we get to decide how society responds to that change together .. rather than have it forced upon us.

replies(26): >>41902001 #>>41902004 #>>41902006 #>>41902027 #>>41902041 #>>41902094 #>>41902144 #>>41902281 #>>41902432 #>>41902446 #>>41902471 #>>41902612 #>>41902683 #>>41902805 #>>41902892 #>>41903019 #>>41903144 #>>41903279 #>>41903529 #>>41903547 #>>41903572 #>>41903881 #>>41904424 #>>41904494 #>>41904546 #>>41905807 #
pjc50 ◴[] No.41902041[source]
> I only hope that we get to decide how society responds to that change together .. rather than have it forced upon us.

That basically never happens and the outcome is the result of some sort of struggle. Usually just a peaceful one in the courts and legislatures and markets, but a struggle nonetheless.

> new methods should be used to assess student performance.

Such as? We need an answer now because students are being assessed now.

Return to the old "viva voce" exam? Still used for PhDs. But that doesn't scale at all. Perhaps we're going to have to accept that and aggressively ration higher education by the limited amount of time available for human-to-human evaluations.

Personally I think all this is unpredictable and destabilizing. If the AI advocates are right, which I don't think they are, they're going to eradicate most of the white collar jobs and academic specialties for which those people are being trained and evaluated.

replies(11): >>41902087 #>>41902096 #>>41902246 #>>41902261 #>>41902287 #>>41902324 #>>41902349 #>>41902440 #>>41902449 #>>41902820 #>>41904142 #
A4ET8a8uTh0 ◴[] No.41902087[source]
<< The grade was ultimately changed, but not before she received a strict warning: If her work was flagged again, the teacher would treat it the same way they would with plagiarism.

<< But that doesn't scale at all.

I realize that the level of effort for oral exam is greater for both parties involved. However, the fact it does not scale is largely irrelevant in my view. Either it evaluates something well or it does not.

And, since use of AI makes written exams almost impossible, this genuinely seems to be the only real test left.

replies(1): >>41902102 #
sersi ◴[] No.41902102[source]
> And, since use of AI makes written exams almost impossible

Isn't it easy to prevent students from using an AI if they are doing the exams in a big room? I mean when I was a student, most of my exams were written with just access to notes but no computers. Not that much resources needed to control that...

replies(1): >>41902186 #
1. A4ET8a8uTh0 ◴[] No.41902186[source]
Good point. I agree, but it goes back to some level of unwillingness to do this the 'old way'.

That is not say there won't be cheaters ( they always are ), but that is what proctor is for. And no, I absolutely hated the online proctor version. I swore I will never touch that thing again. And this may be the answer, people need to exercise their free will a little more forcefully.