College professors are going back to paper exams and handwritten essays to fight students using ChatGPT

Comments

• AlmightySnoo@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  I think that’s actually a good idea? Sucks for e-learning as a whole, but I always found online exams (and by extension online interviews) to be very easy to game.

  source

  • Goodtoknow@lemmy.ca ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Really sucks for people with disabilities and handwriting issues.

    source

    • Mugmoor@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      It’s always sucked for them, and it always will. That’s why we make accommodations for them, like extra time or a smaller/move private exam hall.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
    • Naia@lemmy.blahaj.zone ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      My handwriting has always been terrible. It was a big issue in school until I was able to turn in printed assignments.

      Like with a lot of school things, they do a shit thing without thinking about negative effects. They always want a simple solution to a complex problem.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
    • SocialMediaRefugee@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      They can accommodate those people

      source
    • jivandabeast@lemmy.browntown.dev ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      It does, but hopefully thats what competent accomodation policies are for

      source
    • Tavarin@lemmy.ca ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      I did my undergrad 2008-2012, we had zero online exams. Every exam was in person and hand written. People with disabilities were accommodated, usually with extra writing time for those that need it, or a separate room with a writer for you to narrate to.

      It’s really not a terrible issue, and something universities have been able to deal with for centuries.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
    • Hamartiogonic@sopuli.xyz ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Handwriting an essay means I’m giving 90% of my energy and time to drawing ugly squiggles and 10% to making a sensible argument. If I’m allowed to use a computer, it’s 99% sensible argument and 1% typing. Surely this will not have any impact on the quality of the text the teachers have to read…

      source
    • ratskrad@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      I agree, I think a good compromise like school owned, locked down devices would still achieve the same thing

      source
• HexesofVexes@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Prof here - take a look at it from our side.

  Our job is to evaluate YOUR ability; and AI is a great way to mask poor ability. We have no way to determine if you did the work, or if an AI did, and if called into a court to certify your expertise we could not do so beyond a reasonable doubt.

  I am not arguing exams are perfect mind, but I’d rather doubt a few student’s inability (maybe it was just a bad exam for them) than always doubt their ability (is any of this their own work).

  Case in point, ALL students on my course with low (<60%) attendance this year scored 70s and 80s on the coursework and 10s and 20s in the OPEN BOOK exam. I doubt those 70s and 80s are real reflections of the ability of the students, but do suggest they can obfuscate AI work well.

  source

  • AeroLemming@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    When I was in school, exams were taken on proctored devices that were locked down by the IT team to the point where you couldn’t even close the test software to look at something else. That’s not any less secure than having to hand-write your answers, and while it may have been expensive, I can’t imagine it being more expensive than missing out on automatic organization and/or grading for certain kinds of tests in the long run.

    source

    • HexesofVexes@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      So, we’re working on a study for online Vs in person.

      We’ve noticed that stiict time limits alone tend to shift grades. A locked down browser sounds great, but anyone can search using their phone, so proctoring is a must (but also time consuming to check) if you want to get the intended effect.

      As for online grading, it’s a mixed bag. With a very strict rubric, gradescope can save a lot of time, but otherwise it takes a lot longer. MCQs and single number answers can be auto-matked, but they’re awful at assessing ability and should be avoided. Overall, grading online costs more than it saves, and tends to give much more rigid feedback to students.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
  • Phoebe@feddit.de ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Sorry but it was never about OUR abilility in the firts place.

    In my country exams are old, outdated and often way to hard. In my country all classes are outdated and way to hard. It often feels that we are stucked in the middle of the 20th century.

    You have no change when you have a disability. When you have kids, parents to take care of. Or hell: you have to work, cause you can’t effort university otherwise.

    So i can totaly understand why students feel the need to use AI to survive that torture. I don’t feel sorry for an outdated university system.

    When it is about OUR abilility, then create a System that is for students and their needs.

    source

    • pinkdrunkenelephants@sopuli.xyz ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      If you can use AI to do the homework for you, we can use AI to do the job instead of you

      For the love of god, think beyond yourself for one damn minute

      source

      • -> View More Comments
  • kromem@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Is AI going to go away?

    In the real world, will those students be working from a textbook, or from a browser with some form of AI accessible in a few years?

    What exactly is being measured and evaluated? Or has the world changed, and existing infrastructure is struggling to cling to the status quo?

    Were those years of students being forced to learn cursive in the age of the computer a useful application of their time? Or math classes where a calculator wasn’t allowed?

    I can hardly think just how useful a programming class where you need to write it on a blank page of paper with a pen and no linters might be, then.

    Maybe the focus on where and how knowledge is applied needs to be revisited in light of a changing landscape.

    For example, how much more practically useful might test questions be that provide a hallucinated wrong answer from ChatGPT and then task the students to identify what was wrong? Or provide them a cross discipline question that expects ChatGPT usage yet would remain challenging because of the scope or nuance?

    I get that it’s difficult to adjust to something that’s changed everything in the field within months.

    But it’s quite likely a fair bit of how education has been done for the past 20 years in the digital age (itself a gradual transition to the Internet existing) needs major reworking to adapt to changes rather than simply oppose them, putting academia in a bubble further and further detached from real world feasibility.

    source

    • SkiDude@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      If you’re going to take a class to learn how to do X, but never actually learn how to do X because you’re letting a machine do all the work, why even take the class?

      In the real world, even if you’re using all the newest, cutting edge stuff, you still need to understand the concepts behind what you’re doing. You still have to know what to put into the tool and that what you get out is something that works.

      If the tool, AI, whatever, is smart enough to accomplish the task without you actually knowing anything, what the hell are you useful for?

      source

      • -> View More Comments
    • orangeboats@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      As an anecdotal though, I once saw someone simply forwarding (ie. copy and pasting) their exam questions to ChatGPT. His answers are just ChatGPT responses, but paraphrased to make it look less GPT-ish.

      In this case, the only skill that is tested… is English paraphrasing.

      source
    • HexesofVexes@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      I’ll field this because it does raise some good points:

      It all boils down to how much you trust what is essentially matrix multiplication, trained on the internet, with some very arbitrarily chosen initial conditions. Early on when AI started cropping up in the news, I tested the validity of answers given:

      1. For topics aimed at 10–18 year olds, it does pretty well. It’s answers are generic, and it makes mistakes every now and then.

      2. For 1st–3rd year degree, it really starts to make dangerous errors, but it’s a good tool to summarise materials from textbooks.

      3. Masters+, it spews (very convincing) bollocks most of the time.

      Recognising the mistakes in (1) requires checking it against the course notes, something most students manage. Recognising the mistakes in (2) is often something a stronger student can manage, but not a weaker one. As for (3), you are going to need to be an expert to recognise the mistakes (it literally misinterpreted my own work at me at one point).

      The irony is, education in its current format is already working with AI, it’s teaching people how to correct the errors given. Theming assessment around an AI is a great idea, until you have to create one (the very fact it is moving fast means that everything you teach about it ends up out of date by the time a student needs it for work).

      However, I do agree that education as a whole needs overhauling. How to do this: maybe fund it a bit better so we’re able to hire folks to help develop better courses - at the moment every “great course” you’ve ever taken was paid for in blood (i.e. 50 hour weeks teaching/marking/prepping/meeting arbitrary research requirement).

      source

      • -> View More Comments
    • pinkdrunkenelephants@sopuli.xyz ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Textbooks, like on physical paper, are never going to just go away. They offer way tok many advantages over even reading digital books.

      source
    • AeroLemming@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      I get what you’re saying. I think that programming tests on paper are ridiculous too and that testing people’s ability to write flawless code without a linter is not meaningful in the modern era. AI is a bit different for two reasons.

      1. It’s not reliable. If someone uses AI too heavily, they’re going to be entirely unable to work if their AI of choice spits out the wrong answer or goes offline, both of which happen a LOT. Someone needs to be able to create and verify their own code.

      2. When you write an essay about a topic, it’s not about showing that you can produce an essay about that topic, it’s about showing that you have a well-rounded and decent understanding of the topic and therefore can likely apply it in real-world situations (which are harder to test for). AI provides no value in real-world applications of many subjects you may find yourself writing about.

      source
  • mrspaz@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    I recently finished my degree, and exam-heavy courses were the bane of my existence. I could sit down with the homework, work out every problem completely with everything documented, and then sit to an exam and suddenly it’s “what’s a fluid? What’s energy? Is this a pencil?”

    The worst example was a course with three exams worth 30% of the grade, attendance 5% and homework 5%. I had to take the course twice; 100% on HW each time, but barely scraped by with a 70.4% after exams on the second attempt. Courses like that took years off my life in stress. :(

    source

    • HexesofVexes@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      If you don’t mind me asking - what kind of degree was it, and what format were the exams?

      source
  • Spike@feddit.de ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    We have no way to determine if you did the work, or if an AI did, and if called into a court to certify your expertise we could not do so beyond a reasonable doubt.

    Could you ever though, when giving them work they had to do not in your physical presence? People had their friends, parents or ghostwriters do the work for them all the time. You should know that.

    This is not an AI problem, AI “just” made it far more widespread and easier to access.

    source

    • HexesofVexes@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      “Sometimes” would be my answer. I caught students who colluded during online exams, and even managed to spot students pasting directly from an online search. Those were painful conversations, but I offered them resits and they were all honest and passed with some extra classes.

      With AI, detection is impossible at the moment.

      source
  • Smacks@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Graduated a year ago, just before this AI craze was a thing.

    I feel there’s a social shift when it comes to education these days. It’s mostly: “do 500 - 1,000 word essay to get 1.5% of your grade”. The education doesn’t matter anymore, the grades do; if you pick something up along the way, great! But it isn’t that much of a priority.

    I think it partially comes from colleges squeezing students of their funds, and indifferent professors who just assign busywork for the sake of it. There are a lot of uncaring professors that just throw tons of work at students, turning them back to the textbook whenever they ask questions.

    However, I don’t doubt a good chunk of students use AI on their work to just get it out of the way. That really sucks and I feel bad for the professors that actually care and put effort into their classes. But, I also feel the majority does it in response to the monotonous grind that a lot of other professors give them.

    source
  • garibaldi_biscuit@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Student here - How does that cursive longhand thing go again?

    source

    • HexesofVexes@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      “Avoid at all costs because we hate marking it even more than you hate writing it”?

      An in person exam can be done in a locked down IT lab, and this leads to a better marking experience, and I suspect a better exam experience!

      source
• OkToBeTakei@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  is this the part of our lives that AI is making easier?

  source

  • deweydecibel@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    AI was never about making our lives easier. It’s been a corporate tool out of the gate.

    But this kind of thing really should be handled by Washington, and maybe it would be if we had a functional Congress. Make it illegal for AI companies to sell their services to people for the purpose of cheating or impersonation.

    source

    • Neve8028@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Make it illegal for AI companies to sell their services to people for the purpose of cheating or impersonation.

      How would that work? How do you know someone is cheating? AI can be a great studying tool and those same functions could be considered cheating based on the context that the user is using them in. There’s no way to tell what the user’s intent is.

      source
• MaggiWuerze@feddit.de ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  has led some college professors to reconsider their lesson plans for the upcoming fall semester.

  I’m sure they’ll write exams that actually require an actual understanding of the material rather than regurgitating the seminar PowerPoint presentations as accurately as possible…

  No? I’m shocked!

  source

  • Aurenkin@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    My favourite lecturer at uni actually did that really well. He also said the exam was small and could be done in about an hour or two but gave us a 3 hour timeslot because he said he wanted us to take our time and think about each problem carefully. That was a great class.

    source
• mwguy@infosec.pub ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  They’re about to find out that gen Z has horrible penmanship.

  source

  • Holyginz@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Millennial here, haven’t had to seriously write out anything consistently in decades at this point. There’s no way their handwriting can be worse than mine and still be legible lol.

    source

    • crwcomposer@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      As a millennial with gen Z teens, theirs is worse, though somehow not illegible, lol. They just write like 6 year olds. You can make out the letters, but it looks like they are the product of a child who’s never held a pencil before.

      source
    • mwguy@infosec.pub ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      You’d be so surprised. From my interactions with my younger cousins and in laws, they can’t even write in cursive.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
    • Negrodamus@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Same and times I’ve had to write my hand cramped up so quickly from those muscles not being active for years

      source

      • -> View More Comments
    • Ulv@feddit.nu ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Last week of school i found out my history teacher took all my handwritten things too the language teacher and had her copy it into legibility i felt so bad for that lady.

      source
    • Reverendender@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      I block print and vary caps and lowercase fairly randomly. It’s also fucking torture, and I would walk right out of school if this were done to me. Oh yeah, I’m Gen X.

      source
  • FlyingSquid@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    You’d be surprised. My daughter (13) has better penmanship than I do (46). Although I’m sure my left-handedness doesn’t help there.

    source
• TimewornTraveler@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Can we just go back to calling this shit Algorithms and stop pretending its actually Artificial Intelligence?

  source

  • WackyTabbacy42069@reddthat.com ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    It actually is artificial intelligence. What are you even arguing against man?

    Machine learning is a subset of AI and neural networks are a subset of machine learning. Saying an LLM (based on neutral networks for prediction) isn’t AI because you don’t like it is like saying rock and roll isn’t music

    source

    • over_clox@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      If AI was ‘intelligent’, it wouldn’t have written me a set of instructions when I asked it how to inflate a foldable phone. Seriously, check my first post on Lemmy…

      lemmy.world/post/1963767

      An intelligent system would have stopped to say something like “I’m sorry, that doesn’t make any sense, but here are some related topics to help you”

      source

      • -> View More Comments
    • TimewornTraveler@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      I am arguing against this marketing campaign, that’s what. Who decides what “AI” is and how did we come to decide what fits that title? The concept of AI has been around a long time and it was originally treated as a sci-fi fantasy of sentient androids. Calling it “AI” is just a way to make it sound high tech futuristic dreams-come-true. A predictive text algorithm is hardly “intelligence”. It’s only being called that to make it sound profitable.

      source
  • veniasilente@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Please let’s not defame Djikstra and other Algorithms like this. Just call them “corporate crap”, like what they are.

    source
  • chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Maybe machine learning models technically fit the definition of “algorithm” but it suits them very poorly. An algorithm is traditionally a set of instructions written by someone, with connotations of being high level, fully understood conceptually, akin to a mathematical formula.

    A machine learning model is a soup of numbers that maybe does something approximately like what the people training it wanted it to do, using arbitrary logic nobody can expect to follow. “Algorithm” is not a great word to describe that.

    source
• aulin@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  There are places where analog exams went away? I’d say Sweden has always been at the forefront of technology, but our exams were always pen-and-paper.

  source

  • Leroy@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Same in Germany

    source
  • CapeWearingAeroplane@sopuli.xyz ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Norway has been pushing digital exams for quite a few years, to the point where high school exams went to shit for lots of people this year because the system went down and they had no backup (who woulda thought?). In at least some universities most of or all exams have been digital for a couple years.

    I think this is largely a bad idea, especially on engineering exams, or any exam where you need to draw/sketch or write equations. For purely textual exams, it’s fine. This has also lead to much more multiple-choice or otherwise automatically corrected questions, which the universities explicitly state is a way of cutting costs. I think that’s terrible, nothing at university level should be reduced to a multiple choice question. They should be forbidden.

    source
  • CoderKat@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    The university I went to explicitly did in person written exams for pretty much all exams specifically for anti-cheating (even before the age of ChatGPT). Assignments would use computers and whatnot, but the only way to reliably prevent cheating is to force people to write the exams in carefully controlled settings.

    Honestly, probably could have still used computers in controlled settings, but pencil and paper is just simpler and easier to secure.

    One annoying thing is that this meant they also usually viewed assignments as untrusted and thus not worth much of the grade. You’d end up with assignments taking dozens of hours but only worth, say, 15% of your final grade. So practically all your grade is on a couple of big, stressful exams. A common breakdown I had was like 15% assignments, 15% midterm, and 70% final exam.

    source
  • kiwifoxtrot@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Covid forced the transition to electronic exams in many areas.

    source

    • MBM@lemmings.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Here we went back as quickly as possible because electronic exams are hell

      source
• Rozz@lemmy.sdf.org ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Am I wrong in thinking student can still generate an essay and then copy it by hand?

  source

  • CrimsonFlash@lemmy.ca ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Not during class. Most likely a proctored exam. No laptops, no phones, teacher or proctor watching.

    source

    • Syrc@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      …then why can’t you do that with a school laptop that can’t access the web…?

      source

      • -> View More Comments
  • FlyingSquid@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Only if you memorize it. In which case, why not just memorize the test material?

    source
  • Axxi@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    My first thought was exactly this.

    source
• Mugmoor@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  When I was in College for Computer Programming (about 6 years ago) I had to write all my exams on paper, including code. This isn’t exactly a new development.

  source

  • whatisallthis@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    So what you’re telling me is that written tests have, in fact, existed before?

    What are you some kind of education historian?

    source

    • eager_eagle@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      He’s not pointing out that handwritten tests are not something new, but that using handwritten tests over typing them to reflect the student’s actual abilities is not new.

      source
  • lunarul@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    I had some teachers ask for handwritten programming exams too (that was more like 20 years ago for me) and it was just as dumb then as it is today. What exactly are they preparing students for? No job will ever require the skill of writing code on paper.

    source

    • Dark_Arc@social.packetloss.gg ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      A whiteboard interview…? They’re still incredibly common, especially for new grads.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
    • pinkdrunkenelephants@sopuli.xyz ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Education is not just for getting a job, you dink.

      source
  • eager_eagle@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Same. All my algorithms and data structures courses in undergrad and grad school had paper exams. I have a mixed view on these but the bottom line is that I’m not convinced they’re any better.

    Sure they might reflect some of the student’s abilities better, but if you’re an evaluator interested in assessing student’s knowledge a more effective way is to make directed questions.

    What ends up happening a lot of times are implementation questions that ask from the student too much at once: interpretation of the problem; knowledge of helpful data structures and algorithms; abstract reasoning; edge case analysis; syntax; time and space complexities; and a good sense of planning since you’re supposed to answer it in a few minutes without the luxury and conveniences of a text editor.

    This last one is my biggest problem with it. It adds a great deal of difficulty and stress without adding any value to the evaluator.

    source
• UsernameIsTooLon@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  You can still have AI write the paper and you copy it from text to paper. If anything, this will make AI harder to detect because it’s now AI + human error during the transferring process rather than straight copying and pasting for students.

  source

  • Zacryon@feddit.de ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Noooo. That’s a genious countermeasure without any obvious drawbacks!!1! /s

    source
• Mtrad@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Wouldn’t it make more sense to find ways on how to utilize the tool of AI and set up criteria that would incorporate the use of it?

  There could still be classes / lectures that cover the more classical methods, but I remember being told “you won’t have a calculator in your pocket”.

  My point use, they should prepping students for the skills to succeed with the tools they will have available and then give them the education to cover the gaps that AI can’t solve. For example, you basically need to review what the AI outputs for accuracy. So maybe a focus on reviewing output and better prompting techniques? Training on how to spot inaccuracies? Spotting possible bias in the system which is skewed by training data?

  source

  • Atomic@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    That’s just what we tell kids so they’ll learn to do basic math on their own. Otherwise you’ll end up with people who can’t even do 13+24 without having to use a calculator.

    source
  • settxy@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    There are some universities looking at AI from this perspective, finding ways to teach proper usage of AI. Then building testing methods around the knowledge of students using it.

    Your point on checking for accuracy is on point. AI doesn’t always puke out good information, and ensuring students don’t just blindly believe it NEEDS to be taught. Otherwise wise you end up being these guys… apnews.com/…/artificial-intelligence-chatgpt-cour…

    source
  • Snekeyes@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    It’s like the calculator in the 80s and 90s. Teacher would constantly tell us “no jobs just gonna let you use a calulator, they’re paying you to work”…

    I graduated, and really thought companies were gonna make me do stuff by hand, cause calulators made it easy. Lol.

    source
• thedirtyknapkin@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  as someone with wrist and hand problems that make writing a lot by hand, I’m so lucky i finished college in 2019

  source
• TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  It just brings into question what the point of exams are.

  AI in its current form is equivalent to the advent of the typewriter. Its just empowering you to do a whole lot more a whole lot faster.

  Not using it is dumb.

  source

  • lunarul@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    AI is a tool that can indeed be of great benefit when used properly. But using it without comprehending and verifying the source material can be downright dangerous (like those lawyers citing fake cases). The point of the essay/exam is to test comprehension of the material.

    Using AI at this point is like using a typewriter in a calligraphy test, or autocorrect in a spelling and grammar test.

    Although asking for handwritten essays does nothing to combat use of AI. You can still generate content and then transcribe it by hand.

    source
  • SocialMediaRefugee@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    If that is the case and comprehending the material isn’t necessary then who needs the students in the first place? Just replace them with AI.

    source
• joel_feila@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Well if i go back to school now im fucked i cant read my own hand writting.

  source
• jordanlund@lemmy.one ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Chat GPT - answer this question, add 4 consistent typos. Then hand transcribe it.

  source
• HawlSera@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Isn’t this kind of ableist? Amber when I was in school I had special accommodations to type instead of right, because I had wrists to write legibly, but fingers fast enough to type expediently, they legitimately thought that I was a really stupid kid, until they realize that my spelling tests we’re not incorrect, they just couldn’t read that I had spelled it correctly. Somehow I wrote the word fly, and the teacher mistook but why for a v. I went from being the dumbest kid to the smartest kid as soon as the accommodation was put in place.

  source
• SocialMediaRefugee@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Might as well go back to oral exams and ask the student questions on the spot.

  source
• wings@lemmy.perthchat.org ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Joke’s on you, I can’t write by hand without severe pain after a short while!

  source
• CookieJarObserver@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Fuck them, Fucking assholes.

  source
• ZytaZiouZ@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  The best part is there are hands waiting generating programs or even web pages that convert text to gcode allowing you to use a 3d printer to write things out. In theory it should be really hard to pass it off as being human written, let alone match your own writing, but I’m sure it will only get better. I think there are even models to try to match someone’s writing.

  source
• EngineerGaming@feddit.nl ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Our uni accepts 99% of things on paper (except some reports, which need to be done in Latex), and I am glad this is the case. I just can’t think normally while at the screen. If there’s a task - I need to do it on paper first and only then type out (which is a bit frustrating because I can only type with two fingers).

  source
• efrique@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Waiting for 100% oral exams to make a comeback.

  source
• Meowoem@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Only the ones too dumb to incorporate ai usage into their work and grade accordingly. Going to be a load of kids who aren’t just missing out a learning how to best use modern tools but who have wasted their time learning obsolete skills.

  Thankfully those kids will be able to get a proper education from AI soon.

  source
• rab@lemmy.ca ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  As an anecdote I used to do k-12 sysadmin and we once had a major issue during grade 12 English exam and the students had to handwrite their essays. Almost everyone failed. Most did not even finish. Most students can hardly even handwrite anymore and it makes sense

  source
• foggy@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Mouse, meet Cat.

  source
• Doplano@sh.itjust.works ⁨6⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  thanks for info

  source
• LewisDuncan@sh.itjust.works ⁨6⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  For some time, I relied heavily on artificial intelligence to write essays, thinking that it would simplify the process and save time. However, I soon realized that while AI can generate content, it lacks the human touch and depth required for quality writing. Disappointed with the results, I started looking for a better solution and discovered Masterpapers.com. Their services offered the expertise of real writers who understood my needs and wrote essays with care and attention to detail. The switch was a game changer.

  source
• Chickenstalker@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  If your exams can be solved by AI, then your exams are not good enough. How to get around this? Simple. Oral exams aka viva voce. Anyone who had defended their thesis knows the pants shitting terror this kind of exam does to you. It will take longer but you can truly determine how well the student understands the content.

  source