@ntnsndr I've read all your comments. And I think it could be complemented by a face to face summarize of what they've came out with. Showing they can understand it.
But also very interesting point from Nathan that if they could create the prompts and edits to work it out, could be a fair enough sing.
@GuerillaOntologist they would still have to fulfill the goals of a writing assignment. In my experience I can't get AI to write well for me, but if they can, and it fulfills the assignment, maybe that is okay.
Anything is better than the amount of time I have to spend policing it and dealing with terrible AI checkers.
@ntnsndr Don't you think that begs the question of what higher ed is even for? If you can graduate without having to write anything longer than a ChapGPT prompt, well...we're doomed. And do you really want to be reading a bunch of AI generated text and then grading the student on how well the AI wrote? Again, what is the point of a university if it's just students using AI to write papers (perhaps followed by profs using AI to grade them)?
@GuerillaOntologist it does beg the question, certainly. Though the question was already begged. And allowing AI then forces me to ensure my assignments are good enough that they require real human work, not rote busywork.
@ntnsndr@GuerillaOntologist aye, my family has resolved this for now in turning away from the policing penalizing effort and to rethinking assignments purpose to higher ed and student participation (more focus on in class response time, say). The long form paper has been 'begged' for a long time with various student workarounds - even while I see the point that it consolidated a lot of critical thinking to a common form, it's not all. Cate Denial as much to add to thinking this through.
Add comment