‘But there is a difference between recognising AI use and proving its use. So I tried an experiment. … I received 122 paper submissions. Of those, the Trojan horse easily identified 33 AI-generated papers. I sent these stats to all the students and gave them the opportunity to admit to using AI before they were locked into failing the class. Another 14 outed themselves. In other words, nearly 39% of the submissions were at least partially written by AI.‘
Article archived: https://web.archive.org/web/20251125225915/https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/set-trap-to-catch-students-cheating-ai_uk_691f20d1e4b00ed8a94f4c01
i think that has a less effect on college, COnservatives dont go to college so that wouldnt count. plus participation grades have been around for decades, ever since early 2000s and its mostly for BUDGEt reasons for the school, they dont care if the person fails or not in the future, and they did the disservice by passing them in HS when they should be repeating it.
The idea that conservatives don't go to college is silly. They go to college, and while having a college education does have an impact on a person's political leanings, it's not the outsized one that gets played up in the culture war.
Data from the US:
Participation grades exist, I've taught classes that have them - but they seldom give credits towards degrees, and they aren't a thing in accredited programs (in fact the opposite is usually the case, competitive programs generally have massive classes where you're required to fail hundreds and hundreds of students at a time. The most soul-sucking experiences I have ever had while teaching have been running 600-1200 person weed out classes).
The funding process of a university is not straightforward - but no, the loss of a set of students, especially for cheating, is not a budgetary concern at an accredited institution. Academic standards enforcement is a condition for accreditation, even.