Do you have a dumb question that you're kind of embarrassed to ask in the main thread? Is there something you're just not sure about?
This is your opportunity to ask questions. No question too simple or too silly.
Culture war topics are accepted, and proposals for a better intro post are appreciated.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
To clear this up, I didn't call it laziness, I just listed that as a possible pragmatic blocker. My point is that it's trivially solvable in technical sense. It's really really easy to think of ways to evaluate students or have them practice learning in scenarios that AI cheating could be mitigated. It's not remotely unsolveable in that sense. But there are, to your point structural and indivdual reasons that make implementing such a solution harder.
I have sympathy for these defenses, but not infinity. If it's something any homeschool parent could solve without any innovation, then the school system needs to be able to react to in order to remain a legitimate concept. We can't just 'oh well...' cheating at scale. It needs to be treated as existential to schooling, if it's really this widespread.
There is no legitimate reason an institution of learning, can remain remotely earnest about it's mission as a concept, and still allow graded, asynchronously written reports.
Now of course many of the blockers to reacting to this are an outgrowth of similar challenges schools have faced for decades: The conflicted, in-tension-with-self mission of schooling in general. as described in the excellent book, Somone Has to Fail. Schools simultaneously trying to be a system of equality and meritocracy will fail at both.
But AI has stopped the buck passing; like so many other things, AI is a forcing funciton of exponential scale. I think if the can gets kicked any further, ever single semester, every single assignment, the entire idea of schooling massively delegitimizes itself.
More options
Context Copy link