Off My Chest
RULES:
I am looking for mods!
1. The "good" part of our community means we are pro-empathy and anti-harassment. However, we don't intend to make this a "safe space" where everyone has to be a saint. Sh*t happens, and life is messy. That's why we get things off our chests.
2. Bigotry is not allowed. That includes racism, sexism, ableism, homophobia, transphobia, xenophobia, and religiophobia. (If you want to vent about religion, that's fine; but religion is not inherently evil.)
3. Frustrated, venting, or angry posts are still welcome.
4. Posts and comments that bait, threaten, or incite harassment are not allowed.
5. If anyone offers mental, medical, or professional advice here, please remember to take it with a grain of salt. Seek out real professionals if needed.
6. Please put NSFW behind NSFW tags.
view the rest of the comments
Counterpoint, it means that writing papers is no longer a good exercise for ensuring students are learning material and teachers need to adapt. AI isn't going away and it's a disservice to students to not teach them how to use it, how to find good primary sources, etc
Ok, so draw the rest of the owl then. What alternative is there right now, ready for use, that will engage the students with the material as well as writing does?
Learning how to construct logical arguments, do research that makes sense, and communicate effectively to the right audience, all of which AI writing sucks at.
It's going to differ by subject but take for example a science class: lab activities like having students, in-class come up with a hypothesis, a methodology, and then the ability to carry out the experiment, and form a conclusion. AI can help and teachers should help them use it correctly. Or in history, you can set up debates between two "sides". Think of teaching about the push for unions in the US - have them represent the capitalists and the union leaders. AI can aid with research, have them then manually confirm each to teach about AI hallucinations, then have them debate in-class. I would argue papers are some of the worst ways to ensure students understand a topic but I'm biased as that's just not how my brain works and I always hated writing papers vs doing research and demonstrating understanding
Let me ask you something. It is completely possible for a machine to do simple welds, right? Would you say that there is no reason for a welder to practice simple welds since a machine can do it?
To me, the same is true of writing. Nobody cares about the essay that was written, but it is practicing for writing that people do care about You can't learn skills like this without doing them.
If the class is a writing/language class then yes, work on writing. But if the class is history and writing is simply the task to gauge understanding of the topic, that's no longer the correct approach
That's not actually how school works until advanced grades. Even in the unlikely case they have multiple teachers, the curriculum is designed to reinforce skills across itself. Math has reading, history writing, etc. etc. It is possible for one thing to be doing multiple things and disrupting that ecosystem can easily break it completely.
That's exactly how school works especially in the lower grades - we don't have kindergartners writing papers, we have them hands-on with the subject. Doing experiments in science class to learns concepts like gravity or density is key to how we teach well before the concept of writing papers is introduced