Midway through the semester, I stopped requiring students to disclose their AI use. My syllabi had asked for transparency, yet the expectation had become incoherent. The boundary between using AI and navigating the internet had blurred beyond recognition. Asking students to document every encounter with the technology would have turned writing into an accounting exercise. I shifted my approach. I told students they could use AI for research and outlining, while drafting had to remain their own. I taught them how to prompt responsibly and how to recognize when a tool began replacing their thinking.
I’m really disappointed that the teacher is approving of students using LLMs to research. I know that search engines suck these days, but you really can’t trust LLMs not to lie, and it doesn’t seem worth it to me to have to constantly defend your mind against believing what it is saying without going and verifying every little thing.
At least when a teacher or book tells you something, you have a context with which to weigh how much to believe it.
If they were instructed to follow and actually check the sources ai claims it gets the info from, it could work.
Really, AI is just going to do a complete cancer run on the entire internet. In 10 years time there will be nothing credible. Sources will just point around to ai sources in a giant circle jerk.
I’ve been stockpiling books my entire life for such a Fahrenheit 451 or other style future.
My mom’s a teacher as is her best friend. Granted they both teach advanced classes, they also have some normal classes. I asked them about this last time they were vacationing and they told me almost the opposite. They said the lockdown REALLY fucked some kids up socially, but they said things are more or less like they’ve always been academically.
I know my sample size of n=2 does not a p value of ≤.05 make. But they have been in the game for a very long time.
this is nightmare
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
