3 ms·
> In each of these instances, it is becoming clear that schools do not know what the rules about AI should be and that they are often being made up on the fly.
by slg 2y ago
> In each of these instances, it is becoming clear that schools do not know what the rules about AI should be and that they are often being made up on the fly.
This seems a little uncharitable to me considering society has no idea what the rules around AI should be and is therefore making them on the fly too. Why do we expected school administrators to be so far in front of everyone else on these issues?
- Rinzler89 2y agoUniversities and the professors there, often act as judge, jury and executioner on their fiefdoms. It's not like most students are wealthy enough to afford to sue the university for failing to objectively apply the rules they themselves set.
- dcow 2y agoThis student was, from TFA.
- zamadatix 2y agoBut this student is definitely not most.
- dcow 2y agoNo, most students don’t win entrepreneurial competitions and then get suspended. I guess I’m missing the point.
- zamadatix 2y agoWe expect school administrators to be ahead of others on this issue because of the power imbalance with their application of the policies to students. We're hearing about it because it happened to an anomalous student who was able to fight back. The initial reason remains even though we only read about it through the anomaly. I.e. the point of this thread isn't around the specific case of the anomalous student, rather the issue raised around AI enforcement in schools and what it means for the typical student. And yes, average IT students will still get involved with situations around AI and their school - they just aren't going to make the news with a court case.
- schmidt_fifty 2y ago[dead]
- Arnt 2y agoEach of us should be consistent in our actions and charitable in our interpretations, even if society at large is chaotic, inconsistent and sometimes quick to judge harshly. That applies to universities as much as to your employer and to me personally.
- chongli 2y agoUniversity/college administrators are deeply terrified about AI. They are fully aware of the exclusive role that respected institutions play as gatekeepers of accreditation. They know that the entire value of a diploma or degree from their school is completely founded upon the public perception of its legitimacy. AI threatens to totally erase that legitimacy by making it trivial for anyone to cheat on their assignments, thus preventing the school from properly assessing student learning. Some of this danger can be mitigated by switching assessment exclusively over to in-person, proctored, closed book exams. However, this does not work for many courses in the humanities that are intended to teach critical academic writing. A 3 hour closed book exam is totally inadequate for assessing the student's ability to conduct research and write a long, critical essay. Similar issues exist for many other fields, particularly as you go deeper into specialization in a field where an examination covering basic facts and skills cannot suffice.