from a recently retired professor: I had some thing like the attitude that you have, Daniel. But years ago a couple of students approached me about cheating in my class and my laxness about it, and they argued that it was very discouraging for them to do honest work, and see cheaters rewarded with top grades – – and maybe under cutting their own grades. They felt that I was not respecting them by failing to defend their efforts. It’s a complicated and tricky matter.
I thought it was only me that thought all the relentless hubbub about AI was overblown bullshit. I am therefore grateful for your well-reasoned perspective. Unfortunately, our world revolves around sell, sell, sell, emphasizing profit, and little else.
I see a fundamental (but solvable) problem with Gen AI at least in how educators are approaching its use. There's no roadmap, no taillights to follow. I've found AI quite useful for brainstorming, structuring, shaping, and fluency in my writing and in my students' writing. We must reimagine how we approach writing instruction.
Most instructors have played with the tool with a bias on finding shortcomings. It's an imperfect tool. But with a bit more practice and instruction, Gen AI can improve how students think and write. Those who believe that Gen AI is not creative or original have not exercised the tool enough.
I'm retired & never taught grad students, and I agree with you. I played around with LLMs when they first came out & got total nonsense for any essay I'd assign my students.
from a recently retired professor: I had some thing like the attitude that you have, Daniel. But years ago a couple of students approached me about cheating in my class and my laxness about it, and they argued that it was very discouraging for them to do honest work, and see cheaters rewarded with top grades – – and maybe under cutting their own grades. They felt that I was not respecting them by failing to defend their efforts. It’s a complicated and tricky matter.
I thought it was only me that thought all the relentless hubbub about AI was overblown bullshit. I am therefore grateful for your well-reasoned perspective. Unfortunately, our world revolves around sell, sell, sell, emphasizing profit, and little else.
I see a fundamental (but solvable) problem with Gen AI at least in how educators are approaching its use. There's no roadmap, no taillights to follow. I've found AI quite useful for brainstorming, structuring, shaping, and fluency in my writing and in my students' writing. We must reimagine how we approach writing instruction.
Most instructors have played with the tool with a bias on finding shortcomings. It's an imperfect tool. But with a bit more practice and instruction, Gen AI can improve how students think and write. Those who believe that Gen AI is not creative or original have not exercised the tool enough.
Maybe it's time to "think different."
But what are you going to do about the students who brag about using AI, but are actually using sneaky human intelligence to trick you. (Such as these guys…. https://www.404media.co/kaedim-ai-startup-2d-to-3d-used-cheap-human-labor/)
Ignore them.
At last. Thank you for articulating this perfectly. The end is not nigh, damn it!
I'm retired & never taught grad students, and I agree with you. I played around with LLMs when they first came out & got total nonsense for any essay I'd assign my students.