Detecting AI may be impossible. That’s a big problem for teachers
washingtonpost.com
washingtonpost.com
And even on it's own - that's a practically negligible benefit compared to the considerable risks and costs imposed by the coming epidemic of AI-fostered cheating.
I disagree. Personalized training is so much better, that you wouldn't have to spend so much time doing school or homework or whatever. Imagine a different way of teaching. Say that every student is personally trained and never has to do schoolwork outside of their school. When they are in school they are personally working with an AI tutor and not cheating. Like maybe imagine some kiosk-like thing but friendlier. The students wouldn't be allowed to use phones while working with it.
Sorry - but fantastic claims need fantastic amounts of supporting evidence. It seems that all you have is a hunch that it ought to be so.
When they are in school they are personally working with an AI tutor and not cheating.
Not only is it trivial to see that this does not preclude them from cheating -- the thought of forcing these poor kids to do all their work through bots (and in isolation from other students) is just ... too nauseating to contemplate.
And we're not even talking about what a crap-tastic failure most efforts at online teaching have been so far. It's the complete opposite of the direction we should be moving in.
> "Sorry - but fantastic claims need fantastic amounts of supporting evidence. It seems that all you have is a hunch that it ought to be so."
I'm talking about something specific it's the 'two sigma problem' (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bloom%27s_2_sigma_problem) "the average student tutored one-to-one using mastery learning techniques performed two standard deviations better than students educated in a classroom environment with one teacher to 30 students, with or without mastery learning"
> "Not only is it trivial to see that this does not preclude them from cheating"
If you mean cheating by using advanced AI, I'm not sure what you're talking about. They won't have any devices. You are suggesting they have brain implants or they are smuggling some devices?
> "forcing these poor kids to do all their work through bots (and in isolation from other students) is just ... too nauseating to contemplate."
They only need to spend a fraction of the day doing the personalized 'book learning'. The rest of the time they can spend time playing with their friends. That could even be part of their 'school day'. Just to have fun.
That study refers to one-to-one tutoring by live, in-person teachers. Not your friggen' bots.
I'm sorry, but there's way just too much cognitive dissonance in your arguments. I'm going to have to bow out.
Good point, now that we are getting some "friggen' bots" we should do another study!
Then it will become accepted truth, without you having to do more than barely lift a finger.
The schools of the future are going to be vastly different than we know them today.
Just AI teachers and AI students. No building. Maybe an AI custodian just for laughs.
But AI is going to force changes in that industry, and I wonder if those changes might not be for the best anyway.