←back to thread

395 points pseudolus | 3 comments | | HN request time: 0.022s | source
Show context
dtnewman ◴[] No.43633873[source]
> A common question is: “how much are students using AI to cheat?” That’s hard to answer, especially as we don’t know the specific educational context where each of Claude’s responses is being used.

I built a popular product that helps teachers with this problem.

Yes, it's "hard to answer", but let's be honest... it's a very very widespread problem. I've talked to hundreds of teachers about this and it's a ubiquitous issue. For many students, it's literally "let me paste the assignment into ChatGPT and see what it spits out, change a few words and submit that".

I think the issue is that it's so tempting to lean on AI. I remember long nights struggling to implement complex data structures in CS classes. I'd work on something for an hour before I'd have an epiphany and figure out what was wrong. But that struggling was ultimately necessary to really learn the concepts. With AI, I can simply copy/paste my code and say "hey, what's wrong with this code?" and it'll often spot it (nevermind the fact that I can just ask ChatGPT "create a b-tree in C" and it'll do it). That's amazing in a sense, but also hurts the learning process.

replies(34): >>43633957 #>>43634006 #>>43634053 #>>43634075 #>>43634251 #>>43634294 #>>43634327 #>>43634339 #>>43634343 #>>43634407 #>>43634559 #>>43634566 #>>43634616 #>>43634842 #>>43635388 #>>43635498 #>>43635830 #>>43636831 #>>43638149 #>>43638980 #>>43639096 #>>43639628 #>>43639904 #>>43640528 #>>43640853 #>>43642243 #>>43642367 #>>43643255 #>>43645561 #>>43645638 #>>43646665 #>>43646725 #>>43647078 #>>43654777 #
enjo ◴[] No.43640528[source]
> it's literally "let me paste the assignment into ChatGPT and see what it spits out, change a few words and submit that".

My wife is an accounting professor. For many years her battle was with students using Chegg and the like. They would submit roughly correct answers but because she would rotate the underlying numbers they would always be wrong in a provably cheating way. This made up 5-8% of her students.

Now she receives a parade of absolutely insane answers to questions from a much larger proportion of her students (she is working on some research around this but it's definitely more than 30%). When she asks students to recreate how they got to these pretty wild answers they never have any ability to articulate what happened. They are simply throwing her questions at LLMs and submitting the output. It's not great.

replies(6): >>43640669 #>>43640941 #>>43641433 #>>43642050 #>>43642506 #>>43643150 #
DSingularity ◴[] No.43640669[source]
This is now reality -- fighting to change the students is a losing battle. Besides in terms of normalizing grade distributions this is not that complicated to solve.

Target the cheaters with pop quizzes. Prof can randomly choose 3 questions from assignments. If students cant get enough marks on 2/3 of them they are dealt a huge penalty. Students that actually work through the problems will have no problems with scoring enough marks on 2/3 of the questions. Students that lean irresponsibly on LLMs will lose their marks.

replies(2): >>43640891 #>>43640910 #
cellularmitosis ◴[] No.43640910[source]
Why not just grade solely based on live performance? (quizzes and tests)

Homework would still be assigned as a learning tool, but has no impact on your grade.

replies(6): >>43641029 #>>43641123 #>>43641987 #>>43642145 #>>43643397 #>>43652773 #
deepsun ◴[] No.43641123[source]
I've heard that's how studying is done in Oxford/Cambridge: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tutorial_system
replies(5): >>43641367 #>>43641640 #>>43641919 #>>43641978 #>>43642951 #
HPsquared ◴[] No.43641640[source]
Funnily enough, the best use of AI in education is to serve as exactly this kind of tutor. This is the future of education.
replies(1): >>43641929 #
pja ◴[] No.43641929[source]
The promise of the expansion of this kind of tutorial teaching to everyone via AI is great. The problem is keeping students honest with themselves.
replies(1): >>43643559 #
pc86 ◴[] No.43643559[source]
At the end of the day you can't force people to learn if they don't want to.

As a society we need to be okay with failing people who deserve to fail and not drag people across the finish line at the expense of diluting the degrees of everyone else who actually put in effort.

replies(2): >>43648316 #>>43652088 #
1. amanaplanacanal ◴[] No.43652088[source]
I'm not sure why we care about the degree. Employers care about the degree, but they aren't paying for my education.

The students who want to learn, will learn. For the students who just want the paper so they can apply for jobs, we ought to give them their diploma on the first day of class, so they can stop wasting everybody's time.

replies(2): >>43654826 #>>43656025 #
2. chipsrafferty ◴[] No.43654826[source]
Then employers will stop caring about the degree...
3. pc86 ◴[] No.43656025[source]
Employers want the degree because it's supposed to verify that you have a certain set of knowledge and/or skills, or at the very least, you're capable of thought to the extent required to get that degree. That's the only reason they want it.

Student being unable to unwilling to learn that knowledge or acquire those skills should mean they don't get that degree, they don't get those jobs, and they go work in fast food or a warehouse.

"Just give them the degree" is quite literally the worst possible solution to the problem.