Wouldn't a written exam--or even a digital one, taken in class on school-provided machines--be almost as good?
As long as it's not a hundred person class or something, you can also have an oral component taken in small groups.
And universities wonder why enrollment is dropping.
Ask the student to come to the exam and write something new, which is similar to what they've been working on at home but not the same. You can even let them bring what they've done at home for reference, which will help if they actually understand what they've produced to date.
Let me ask, how do you generally feel when you contact customer service about something and you get an AI chatbot? Now imagine the chatbot is responsible for whether you pass the course.
If the class cost me $50? Then sure, use Dr. Slop to examine my knowledge. But this professor's school charges them $90,000 a year and over $200k to get an MBA? Hell no!
At that point what’s the value add over using YouTube videos and ChatGPT on your own?
Adding this as an additional optional tool, though, is an excellent idea.
Students had and still have the option to collectively choose not to use AI to cheat. We can go back to written work at any time. And yet they continue to use it. Curious.
Wouldn't that be a fine outcome?
Individuals can't "collectively" choose anything.
This test is given to the entire class, including people who never touched AI.
Students could absolutely organize a consensus decision to not use AI. People do this all the time. How do you think human organizations continue to exist?
I know we've had historical record of people saying this for 2000 years and counting, but I suspect the future is well and truly bleak. Not because of the next generation of students, but because of the current generation of educators unable to successfully adapt to new challenges in a way that is actually beneficial to the student that it is supposed to be their duty to teach.