Students Hate Them. Universities Need Them. The Only Real Solution to the A.I. Cheating Crisis.
Since A.I. has made the mental effort of writing and problem solving optional, universities need new ways to require the work needed for learning.
I remember the moment I knew my approach to student use of artificial intelligence was not working.
Early in a meeting at N.Y.U.'s Abu Dhabi campus last fall, a philosophy professor, arms crossed over his chest, told me he'd tried one of the strategies my office had suggested — talking with his students about the ways A.I. could interfere with their learning — and it hadn't worked. His students had listened politely, then several of them had used A.I. to write their papers anyway. He particularly wanted me to know that "even the good students," the ones who showed up to class wanting to talk about the readings, were using A.I. to avoid work outside class.
This was a theme I'd hear over and over, listening to faculty members across disciplines at the end of the semester; even some of the students who obviously cared about the material and seemed to like the classes were no longer doing the hard work of figuring out what they wanted to say. Our A.I. strategy had assumed that encouraging engaged uses of A.I. — telling students they could use software like ChatGPT to generate practice tests to quiz themselves, explore new ideas or solicit feedback — would persuade students to forgo the lazy uses. It did not...
Clay Shirky
Since A.I. has made the mental effort of writing and problem solving optional, universities need new ways to require the work needed for learning.
I remember the moment I knew my approach to student use of artificial intelligence was not working.
Early in a meeting at N.Y.U.'s Abu Dhabi campus last fall, a philosophy professor, arms crossed over his chest, told me he'd tried one of the strategies my office had suggested — talking with his students about the ways A.I. could interfere with their learning — and it hadn't worked. His students had listened politely, then several of them had used A.I. to write their papers anyway. He particularly wanted me to know that "even the good students," the ones who showed up to class wanting to talk about the readings, were using A.I. to avoid work outside class.
This was a theme I'd hear over and over, listening to faculty members across disciplines at the end of the semester; even some of the students who obviously cared about the material and seemed to like the classes were no longer doing the hard work of figuring out what they wanted to say. Our A.I. strategy had assumed that encouraging engaged uses of A.I. — telling students they could use software like ChatGPT to generate practice tests to quiz themselves, explore new ideas or solicit feedback — would persuade students to forgo the lazy uses. It did not...
Clay Shirky
No comments:
Post a Comment