3 ms·
> It was always a cost saving measure because allocating 30min face to face time with each individual student for each class is such a gigantic cost for the ins
by ordu 2y ago
> It was always a cost saving measure because allocating 30min face to face time with each individual student for each class is such a gigantic cost for the institution that they cannot even imagine doing it.
So the obvious solution is to make students to talk with an AI, which would grade their performance. Or, maybe the grading itself could be done by a minimum wage assistant, while AI would lead the discussion with a student.
- lukan 2y agoI hope that was sarcasm?
- ordu 2y agoProbably. I'm not sure myself. It is, because I'm becoming tired with the current AI hype. It lasts too long to be funny. OTOH, professor talking with a student is a good way to assess the academic performance of the student, but there are some caveats beyond costs. For example, professor will struggle to be an objective judge. Moreover even if they succeed, they would face accusations of discrimination in any case. AI could solve this problem, but I'm not sure if AIs will be up to a task of leading the discussion. Though maybe if you try to assess students on their ability to catch AI on a hallucinated bullshit...
- lukan 2y ago"OTOH, professor talking with a student is a good way to assess the academic performance of the student, but there are some caveats beyond costs" Why not have the testing done externally, by really neutral persons? But AIs and especially LLMs are way too unreliable for the foreseeable future.
- michaelmrose 2y agoActually deliberately introducing confidently delivered and reasonable sounding bullshit sounds like a fantastic way to suss out who knows their topic.