- Teachers are overworked, underpaid, some still using course work that hasn’t been updated in years despite what the field has advanced
- Students go into college due to the social expectation, some even unsure of what to get into as a career or even a class
- Exceeding above the course requirements does nothing for your GPA, an A that got a “110%” and an A that got 90% are the same.
- Students failing or passing still rack up debt for this social expectation
- Teachers still failing to pay bills for this social need
Yeah AI is the fault here, its not the system at large been fucked over since Reagan.
Is it really screwing up the education system, or is it just revealing how screwed up it already was?
The corrupt cheapskates trying to nickel and dime every ISD in the country to bankruptcy absolutely fell over one another at the opportunity to fire staff and replace them with Clippy.
Twenty years ago, state officials were all fawning over the idea of turning every university in the country into a pile subscription based Udemy online courses. Ten years ago, letting Pearson hijack the lesson plan of every classroom in the country was the dream. This has been a long time coming.
ISD
Imperial Star Destroyer?
Independent School District.
Although, given how my Houston ISD is being run after being hijacked by the state government…
Came here to say that. If AI has the leeway to affect things in a negative way, then we’re not focusing on the right things to begin with. If kids are graded sometimes for the amount of (not necessarily coherent and sound) text they’re able to spit out, this is what you get.
Not US but I still remember printing off a full page of text, teacher looked at it for less than 5 seconds before giving it a tick. This is all meaningless, no one is reading it, no one cares, nothing matters.
I’ve definitely never only read halfway through a long comment and still upvoted
I would have thought marking coursework has a higher standard than upvoting a lemmy post, but turns out it’s the other way around
I’m not talking about the US specifically either. It’s a global problem.
Well, here’s how you figure that out - think about it with your brain. Should children and young adults be given materials and assignments that require them to use thinking and develop their brains, or should they be given machines to do their thinking for them so that it’s easier to complete schoolwork?
One route develops valuable brain skills that can be useful for life, and the other teaches dependency on fancy machines to accomplish the same.
I teach at a community college. I see a lot of AI nonsense in my assignments.
So much so that I’m considering blue book exams for the fall.
For anyone who is also not from the US:
A blue book exam is a type of test administered at many post-secondary schools in the United States. Blue book exams typically include one or more essays or short-answer questions. Sometimes the instructor will provide students with a list of possible essay topics prior to the test itself and will then choose one or let the student choose from two or more topics that appear on the test.
EDIT, as an extra to solve the mystery:
Butler University in Indianapolis was the first to introduce exam blue books, which first appeared in the late 1920s.[1] They were given a blue color because Butler’s school colors are blue and white; therefore they were named “blue books”.
Importantly it is hand written, no computers.
Biggest issue is that kids’ handwriting often sucks. That’s not a new problem but it’s a problem with handwritten work.
Give them typewriters
There is test-taking software that locks out all other functions during the essay-writing period. Obviously, damn near anything is hackable, but it’s non-trivial, unlike asking ChatGPT to write your essay for you in the style of a B+ high student. There is some concern about students who learn differently or compose less efficiently, but as father to such a student, I’m still getting to the point where I’m not sure what’s left to do other than sandbox “exploitable” graded work in a controlled environment.
I love this idea.
Speaking from a life of dyspraxia - no, not everyone with sucky handwriting is lazy, many of us would spend 95% of our capacity on making the writing legible and be challenged to learn the actual topic as a result.
I can get the essay done in time or it can be easy to read it cannot be both
This is why we have accommodations offices at colleges.
No problem giving an alternative for those who need it.
In the 1980s that wasn’t really a thing. Besides, it taught me a valuable skill: I partnered with someone who was good at taking notes and I was good at paying attention without taking any notes - she, too, had a problem understanding what she was writing down while writing it down, but took beautiful copies of the lecture. So, afterwards we’d get together and I’d explain her notes to her - which helped me to cement the concepts in my head, at least long enough to get through the exam, and she got her notes explained.
Computers with some encyclopedia, but no GPTs are fine, no?
If a kid can write and train a mini-GPT trainable on that encyclopedia, then maybe they deserve the mark for desperation and ingenuity and being a fucking new Leonardo.
Open book and calculators would seem reasonable. No communication or searching devices.
No communication - of course, but about search - I don’t think having a Wikipedia snapshot with search is bad.
GPTs are fine, if you learn to disrespect their output and fix it before presenting it as your own.
Actually, taught that way, GPT may be a tool for teaching critical thinking - if the professors aren’t too lazy to mark down the garbage output.
Only if the first draft is the student’s own creation otherwise they will never learn how to analyze a work and construct the argument theu want to make beginning to end.
A lot of people “have trouble getting started” - in all kinds of endeavors. Once you get them rolling, they can see the pattern and do it for themselves next time. If the AI glop gets lucky and copied decent argument from beginning to end (something I’ve seen it fail spectacularly at many times), then that can help jumpstart people who are stuck, but only if they can recognize when it’s just a bunch of glop.
Really, if would be better for them to read a bunch of samples for themselves (which is what the AI does) and hopefully they can get the pattern. What I think is a horrible approach is to sit in a lecture hall and listen to a little guy down front drone in a monotone about the theory of what you are supposed to do, then try to synthesize from the fragments of what you understood from that what is expected. Samples to work from are much more efficient.
Man, the US has a handwriting problem. It sucks sooo much. In other countries it seems to be only doctors, but in the US? Fucking everyone.
Oh. Hate that. You have a list of subjects, prepare for them as good as you can, then get one you know and one you don’t, start with one you don’t know - not be in time or mood to finish one you know, get something shitty, the other way around - do the one you know and then be interrupted while you just probably remembered something about the one you don’t, get something shitty.
I have a friend who has taught Online university writing for the past 10 years. Her students are now just about 100% using AI - her goal isn’t to get them to stop, it’s to get them to recognize what garbage writing is and how to fix it so it isn’t garbage anymore.
her goal isn’t to get them to stop, it’s to get them to recognize what garbage writing is and how to fix it so it isn’t garbage anymore.
Sadly, that may be the best we can hope for.
I teach Philosophy.
I need them to think for themselves, which just isn’t happening if they turn in work that isn’t theirs.
So, I’m pretty harsh on anyone using AI. Even if it’s for a discussion post, I’m reporting it to the Academic Integrity office.
Fair distinction. Arguably, writing isn’t about thinking.
her goal isn’t to get them to stop, it’s to get them to recognize what garbage writing is and how to fix it so it isn’t garbage anymore.
I wish English teachers did this instead of… Whatever TF they’re doing instead.
This is something they should’ve been doing all along. Long before the invention of LLMs or computers.
It’s breathtaking how quickly the President of the United States and his good South African buddy can topple a superpower.
Don’t worry they’ve defunded all of the bodies that might have compiled any fair statistics so they can deny the downfall for a few years.
Going to have generations of people unable to think analytically or creatively, and just as bad, entering fields that require a real detailed knowledge of the subject and they don’t. Going to see a lot of fuck ups in engineering, medicine, etc because of people faking it.
I am having flashbacks to the scene in Idiocracy where the doctor is talking about his wife.
She’s a pilot now.
…or will be in 480 years.
Lmao. I’m guessing you don’t work in any of those fields. Got some bad news for ya bud. It’s been that way for decades. Probably centuries.
Don’t tell them it applies pretty damn perfectly to journalism and online commentators that both heavily shape their worldview even indirectly (because even if you don’t believe it your homies will and you get peer pressured) because they’ll go into a loop.
Why do you need to learn reams of facts when you can get an answer in the fraction of a second ? Seems pointless anyway.
Unpopular opinion:
I am a public school teacher and I support public schools, but there have been a lot of issues with our education system for a long time. Talk to any kid with ADHD who had to sit through 12 years, and they are indicative of a larger problem. Our idea of school now is as a place that teaches kids to behave and mostly follow rote instruction. Wouldn’t it be so much better if we were teaching kids to be creative thinkers, work well in groups, problem solve, and think critically about the information they’re getting? We know that’s what school should be, but maybe now we will be forced to go there. Yes, there will be issues like learned helplessness and certain skills being difficult to teach, but it’s kind of exciting too.
Though it’s also possible that public schools will close and only the wealthy kids will be well-educated… can we not, please?
Man, I am 38. When I was in highschool I was in an alternative curriculum Math program called IMP, and it is/was literally what your talking about.
Instead of memorizing equations we were instead given a hypothetical situation and learned to solve it socratically both through conversations as a class with the teacher, and in small groups to try and figure out how to solve it. It made me love math so much I almost made it my life, it was literally everything I needed as a severely ADHD teen. Everything was a puzzle to be solved, and when you solved it you gained not just knowledge, but the perspective to know where the knowledge applies.
OpenSciEd is a model that teaches science like that. There’s been a ton of pushback from conservatives.
This is me with coding. Learn the rules. See a problem. Code a solution.
only the wealthy kids will be well-educated
You could argue we’re already way too far down this road. Quality of education is very dependent on location. Some of it is rich districts but also richer states. Whatever level of granularity you want, there’s always sone more willing or more able to spend money on better educating their children.
For all its faults, Department of Education was at least trying to set minimum standards for those areas unwilling to invest in a good education system and minimum investments for those unable. We desperately needed to raise this bar, not remove it
Anyhow my kids school leaned into ai a bit and taught the kids some valuable lessons about how it works, where it helps, and especially its limitations. There’s nothing wrong with ai as a tool, as by long as you don’t treat it as a magical thing that can think for you
There is plenty wrong with generative AI as a tool if you think of it in those terms.
I would say that if the depth of analysis is limited to “AI” or “genAI” then use of it in schools is overwhelmingly bad. If that’s the limit of our ability to frame the issue, then banning AI would appear inevitable, and any graded assignment that might encourage AI use should be banned.
But if you want to break things down, you can find specific tools (i.e., calculators, grammar checkers) that could be labeled as AI or specific uses of genAI (i.e., brainstorming) that have use. And it is this latter approach – clearly identifying positive uses – that is difficult for students, media writers, and apparently policy makers to do.
I wouldn’t call it unpopular because how the education system works in America and several other countries has been a very obvious problem for decades. What we should be teaching is more barometer question
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barometer_question
The student admitted that he knew the expected “conventional” answer, but was fed up with the professor’s "teaching him how to think … rather than teaching him the structure of the subject.
“Though it’s also possible that public schools will close and only the wealthy kids will be well-educated… can we not, please?”
Trump and Republicans would like nothing more than to turn this country into another Russia where your kids have to pay through the nose go abroad to get a decent education.
As someone with adhd the public school system was hell. My local community college had a program where you could get your ged and learn a trade so I left my junior year to do that instead. I really wish the public school system was better but sadly people just don’t care enough.
I work with special needs kids in a school district and the amount of access kids with even mild symptoms is atrocious. It’s a huge problem.
The cynical view of America’s educational system—that it is merely a means by which privileged co-eds can make the right connections, build “social capital,” and get laid—is obviously on full display here.
Cynical? I call that realistic. That’s what privileged co-eds have been using it for the past 100 years.
more like 200
More like 1000
Wait wait, can this be where we get “a load of Bologna (baloney)” from? Or is that because no one knows what’s actually in bologna…
I’m thinking the only way people will be able to do schoolwork without cheating now is going to be to make them sit in a monitored room and finish it there.
I really hope I’m dead before we have androids.
When I asked him why he had gone through so much trouble to get to an Ivy League university only to off-load all of the learning to a robot, he said, “It’s the best place to meet your co-founder and your wife.”
Yikes.
Where are these kids getting these ideas?
That only works if you’re already fantastically wealthy.
Jfc.
Yes and no. Remember that rich kids could always hire ghost writers. ChatGPT made that available to the masses, but that particular problem goes back centuries.
What we have seen is that the curriculum is often decided by a distant committee who actually doesn’t understand life on the ground. In reality, there are easy ways for teachers to undercut the utility of ChatGPT, if they have the freedom to make changes. But that depends on teachers having control and the time to make changes to how they teach.
Imagine paying tens of thousands of dollars (probably of their parents saved money) to go to university and have a chatbot do the whole thing for you.
These kids are going to get spit out into a world where they will have no practical knowledge and no ability to critically think or adapt.
Do you really think schools teach critical thinking and practical knowledge? State mandated education is geared to produce people who are smart enough to run the system and stupid enough not to question it. The fact that this dullard factory is being distrupted by what is essentially an electronic parrot speaks volumes about the whole charade.
I’m not talking about state mandated education. Nobody is required to attend university.
If you go to a college worth attending, they will teach you critical thinking skills as part of the course requirements.
Regardless, the situation with generative AI is not helping in that regard.
Honest question: how do we measure critical thinking and creativity in students?
If we’re going to claim that education is being destroyed (and show we’re better than our great^n grandparents complaining about the printing press), I think we should try to have actual data instead of these think-pieces and anecdata from teachers. Every other technology that the kids were using had think-pieces and anecdata.
As far as I can tell, the strongest data is wrt literacy and numeracy, and both of those are dropping linearly with previous downward trends from before AI, am I wrong? We’re also still seeing kids from lockdown, which seems like a much more obvious ‘oh that’s a problem’ than the AI stuff.
Honest question: how do we measure critical thinking and creativity in students?
The only serious method of evaluating critical thinking and creativity is through peer evaluation. But that’s a subjective scale thick with implicit bias, not a clean and logical discrete answer. It’s also not something you can really see in the moment, because true creativity and critical thinking will inevitably produce heterodox views and beliefs.
Only by individuals challenging and outperforming the status quo to you see the fruits of a critical and creative labor force. In the moment, these folks just look like they’re outliers who haven’t absorbed the received orthodoxy. And a lot of them are. You’ll get your share of Elizabeth Holmes-es and Sam Altmans alongside your Vincent Van Goghs and Nikolai Teslas.
I think we should try to have actual data instead of these think-pieces and anecdata from teachers.
I agree that we’re flush with think-pieces. Incidentally, the NYT Op-Ed section has doubled in size over the last few years.
But that’s sort of the rub. You can’t get a well-defined answer to the question “Is Our Children Creative-ing?” because we only properly know it by the fruits of the system. Comically easy to walk into a school with a creative writing course and scream about how this or that student is doing creativity wrong. Comically easy to claim a school is Marxist or Fascist or too Pro/Anti-Religion or too banal and mainstream by singling out a few anecdotes in order to curtail the whole system.
The fundamental argument is that this kind of liberal arts education is wasteful. The output isn’t steady and measureable. The quality of the work isn’t easily defined as above or below the median. It doesn’t yield real consistent tangible economic value. So we need to abolish it in order to become more efficient.
And that’s what we’re creating. A society that is laser-focused on making economic numbers go up, without stopping to ask whether a larger GDP actually benefits anyone living in the country where all this fiscal labor is performed.
I think it’s fine for this to be poorly defined; what I want is something aligned with reality beyond op-eds. Qualitative evidence isn’t bad; but I think it needs to be aggregated instead of anecdoted. Humans are real bad at judging how the kids are doing (complaints like the OP are older than liberal education, no?); I don’t want to continue the pattern. A bunch of old people worrying too much about students not reading shakespear in classes is how we got the cancel culture moral panic - I’d rather learn from that mistake.
A handful of thoughts: There are longitudinal studies that interview kids at intervals; are any of these getting real weird swings? Some kids have AI earlier; are they much different from similar peers without? Where’s the broad interviews/story collection from the kids? Are they worried? How would they describe their use and their peers use of AI?
A bunch of old people worrying too much about students not reading shakespear in classes is how we got the cancel culture moral panic - I’d rather learn from that mistake.
The “old people complaining about Shakespeare” was the thin end of the wedge intended to defund and dismantle public education. But the leverage comes from large groups of people who are sold the notion that children are just born dumb or smart and education has no material benefit.
A lot of this isn’t about teaching styles. It’s about public funding of education and the neo-confederate dream of a return to ethnic segregation.
There are longitudinal studies that interview kids at intervals; are any of these getting real weird swings?
A lot of these studies come out of public sector federal and state education departments that have been targeted by anti-public education lobbying groups. So what used to be a wealth of public research into the benefits of education has dried up significantly over the last generation.
What we get instead is a profit-motivated push for standardized testing, lionized by firms that directly benefit from public sector purchasing of test prep and testing services. And these tend to come via private think-tanks with ties back to firms invested in bulk privatization of education. So good luck in your research, but be careful when you see something from CATO or The Gates Foundation, particularly in light of the fact that more reliable and objective data has been deliberately purged from public records.
What’s breathtaking is how clueless education system administrators are failing at their jobs. They’ve been screwing up the system for a very long time, and now they have a whole new set of shiny objects to spend your money on.
In my former school district they paid a ton to some consultancy firm to “use AI to optimize the bus route”. The first day of testing the new route many kids didn’t get home until after 9pm. They cancelled school for the rest of the week and then immediately reverted to the old route.
Ah yes, goal misalignment at its finest.
The students need high grades to get a job, so they focus on ensuring that happens (AI use being the easy path).
The teachers have progression targets to meet, so they focus on ensuring this happens (keep the AI vulnerable assessments).
If you want to change a module as a teacher, good luck getting that work loaded when you should be implementing AI in your curriculum ^_^
If success is determined by a metric, the metric will go up. Any relation to actual increase in value is coincidental. Lol. Long ago someone tried to incentivize programers by giving abonus per bug fixed. Didn’t last long before they blew through the bonus budget and realized the programers were putting in bugs so they could fix them. (Urban legend really… probably)
It’s kinda funny cause usually isn’t it the AI agent that has a misaligned goal? Like when I say don’t die, and it discovers that pausing Tetris technical means you never die. But now it’s students that have been given the wrong goal: pass the test by whatever means (e.g. use AI).
That’s the real joke behind it all, the use of AI is such a problem because we’re turning education into a stamp dispenser - everyone needs an A* to get anywhere.
AI has given every student a path to this - however if industry stopped demanding that universities train their damn staff for them, and instead insist we teach their future staff how to be trained (as well as giving them subject specific knowledge), then we’d see the misalignment vanish. Once the need for an A* to land a good job is gone, then so is the misalignment.
AI is bullshit and has no place in a school curriculum outside of computer science. Keep that shit away from children if you want them to have any critical thinking skills.
In practice you’re right, and I’m not going to even try to argue the real life consequences AI has caused. However I disagree that AI doesn’t have any place in the education system. Used on the appropriate problems, AI is a tool that makes a few things which were challenging to compute much easier. One example is large AI models folding proteins for medical research. A problem that took a computer a day or more to solve can be solved in hours on the same equipment using AI software. That’s just one application that admittedly isn’t useful to school aged children but it’s still one useful example of AI. There are others. Students should be taught how to use AI properly, and part of that is teaching them what it’s good at and what it’ll never be able to do.
The part I get angry about is disgusting Tech Bro Billionaires trying to shove AI into every piece of software they can. Just like the block chain they’re over promising and there’s a bubble. Unlike block chain technology AI actually has a few useful applications and because of that it’ll take a lot longer that BitCoin to finally level out.
The protein-folding ai is not the same as the generative ai.
It’s really unfortunate that the conversation around AI lumps these different technologies together
Generative ai is a tool that must be used carefully else the kids will take the easy path.
Student: AI, write my thesis for me!
Prof: AI, was this thesis generated by AI?
AI: yes, of course, you poor human!
Prof: …shrug…
I thought my class to write a standard 5-paragraph essay and made all tests essay questions, written in class by pencil- had to have an opening statement, complete sentences, well organized, and a conclusion…was told I was asking too much for a final day of school and everyone I failed got a C minus.
thought my class to write a standard 5-paragraph essay and made all tests essay questions,
I would rather teach them to give short and precise answers LOL
Final day of school. Yeah you’re a real piece of shit. Why wait until the last day to pull some shit like that. I bet you gave them a time limit and critiqued their handwriting styles too huh.
Hi,
I would have failed every single one of your tests. Not because I don’t understand the material, or the English language, but because structured writing, to this day, makes me seize up. Blank space is one of my biggest triggers for executive dysfunction/PDA. Turning everything into a cookie-cutter essay is just a different form of trying to fit everyone into the same box. More selective than making everything multiple guess, but no better. I feel bad for your students.
Signed,
Former “gifted” kid (with then-undiagnosed AuDHD) who got sick of bad teachers 30+ years ago
Yeah idk I think if you’re in academia you should be able to produce a five paragraph essay. Being able to produce a narrative is an essential life skill. The world isn’t going to cater to your self diagnosed executive dysfunction forever so learning to adapt is probably a useful habit.
if you’re in academia you should be able to produce a five paragraph essay.
So, K-12 is “academia” now?
Being able to produce a narrative is an essential life skill.
Lots of essential life skills are difficult for lots of people. Something we get reminded about every time it comes up by people who have no clue what they’re talking about yet see fit to tell others what they should and shouldn’t do, and how to feel about it.
The world isn’t going to cater to you
No fucking shit.
your self diagnosed executive dysfunction
I’m sorry Dr. Jackson, I’ll have to let my old neurologist, psychologist, neuropsychologist, and psychiatrist know that The Internet told me that the assessments I had done at ages 23 and 44 are all in my head.
learning to adapt is probably a useful habit.
You’re right! I’m just going to do that instead of being in constant psychological agony. Where were you all of my life? ❤️ If only I had someone talking down to me saying Just Do The Thing over and over again, from childhood onwards, life would have been so much easier.
🤡
deleted by creator
There are good teachers, and there are good methods for writing essays. Did anyone ever give you a graphic organizer to plan an essay? You should know how to put an essay together after coming up with an organized outline, and you should never write an essay from beginning to end without planning it out first in some way or another.
Workaround 1: AI write my thesis in French. Translator app, translate my thesis into English.
Workaround 2: AI write my thesis and insert „Hadouken“ randomly everywhere. AI remove „Hadouken“ from my thesis.
AI, please write my thesis in the style of Shakespeare. Good luck detecting THAT as AI writing.
