The book report is now a thing of the past. Taking home tests and essays is getting old.
High school and college educators across the country say the use of artificial intelligence by students has become so widespread that asking them to write outside of class is like asking students to cheat.
“The cheating is off the charts. It’s the worst I’ve seen in my entire career,” says Casey Cuny, who has taught English for 23 years. Educators are no longer concerned about whether students will outsource their schoolwork to AI chatbots. “Anything you send home, you have to assume it’s Ai’ed.”
The question now is how schools can adapt, as many of the teaching and assessment tools used for generations are no longer effective. As AI technology rapidly improves and becomes more intertwined with everyday life, it is transforming how students learn and learn, how teachers teach, and it is creating new uncertainty about what constitutes academic dishonesty.
“We have to ask ourselves, what is cheating?” says Cuny, the 2024 recipient of the California Teacher of the Year award. “Because I think the lines are getting blurred.”
CUNY students at Valencia High School in Southern California now do the most writing in class. He monitors students’ laptop screens from his desktop, using software that allows him to “lock” the screens or block access to certain websites. He also integrates AI into his lessons and teaches students how to use AI as a teaching aid “so that kids learn with AI, not cheat on AI.”
In rural Oregon, middle school teacher Kelly Gibson has made a similar shift to classroom writing. She also incorporates more verbal assessments to get students talking about their comprehension of assigned reading.
“I used to call a prompt and say, ‘I want a five-paragraph essay in two weeks,’” Gibson says. “I can’t do that these days. It’s almost begging teenagers to cheat.”
Take, for example, what used to be a typical high school English assignment: write an essay explaining the importance of social class in “The Great Gatsby.” Many students say their first instinct now is to ask Chatgpt for help “brainstorming.” Within seconds, ChatGPT comes up with a list of essay ideas, along with examples and quotes to back them up. The chatbot ends by asking if it can do more: “Would you like help writing a part of your essay? I can help you write an introduction or outline a paragraph!”
Students say they often turn to AI with good intentions for things like research, editing, or helping them read complex texts . But AI offers an unprecedented temptation, and sometimes it’s hard to know where to draw the line.
College student Lily Brown, a psychology major at an East Coast liberal arts school, relies on Chatgpt to help her outline essays because she struggles with her own pieces. Chatgpt also helped her through a freshman philosophy class where assigned readings “felt like another language” until she read summaries of texts.
“Dažreiz es jūtos slikti, izmantojot Chatgpt, lai apkopotu lasīšanu, jo es domāju, vai šī krāpšanās palīdz man veidot izklāstu krāpšanos? Ja es rakstu eseju savos vārdos un jautāju, kā to uzlabot, vai kad tā sāk rediģēt manu eseju, vai tā ir krāpšanās?”
Viņas klases mācību programma saka tādas lietas kā: “Nelietojiet AI, lai rakstītu esejas un veidotu domas,” viņa saka, bet tas atstāj daudz pelēkas zonas. Studenti saka, ka viņi bieži kautrējas no skaidrības prasīšanas skolotājiem, jo, atzīstot jebkuru AI lietošanu, viņi var atzīmēt viņus kā krāpnieku.
Skolas mēdz atstāt AI politiku skolotājiem, kas bieži nozīmē, ka noteikumi vienā un tajā pašā skolā ir ļoti atšķirīgi. Piemēram, daži pedagogi atzinīgi vērtē Grammarly.com, ar AI darbināmu rakstīšanas asistenta izmantošanu, lai pārbaudītu gramatiku. Citi to aizliedz, atzīmējot, ka rīks piedāvā arī teikumus pārrakstīt.
“Neatkarīgi no tā, vai jūs varat izmantot AI vai nē, ir atkarīgs no katras klases. Tas var sajaukt,” saka Valensijas 11. klases audzēknis Džolijs Lahejs, kurš kreditē Cuny, mācot viņas otrā kursa studentu angļu klasei, piemēram, dažādām AI prasmēm, piemēram, kā augšupielādēt studiju ceļvežus Chatgpt un tērzēšanas robota viktorīnu tās un pēc tam izskaidrot problēmas, kuras viņi kļūdījās.
Bet šogad viņas skolotājiem ir stingra politika “nav ai”. “Tas ir tik noderīgs rīks. Un, ja mums nav atļauts to izmantot, tam vienkārši nav jēgas,” saka Lahejs. “Tas jūtas novecojis.”
Daudzas skolas sākotnēji aizliedza izmantot AI pēc tam, kad Chatgpt tika uzsākta 2022. gada beigās. Bet viedokļi par mākslīgā intelekta lomu izglītībā ir dramatiski mainījušies. Termins “AI lasītprasme” ir kļuvis par skolas sezonas buzz vārdu, koncentrējoties uz to, kā līdzsvarot AI stiprās puses ar tā riskiem un izaicinājumiem.
Vasarā vairākas koledžas un universitātes sasauca savas AI darba grupas, lai izstrādātu Sīkākas vadlīnijas Vai arī sniedziet mācībspēkus ar jaunām instrukcijām.
Kalifornijas Universitāte Bērklijs pa e -pastu nosūtīja visu fakultātes jauno AI norādījumus, kas viņiem uzdod “iekļaut skaidru paziņojumu par savu mācību programmu par kursa cerībām” ap AI lietošanu. Piedāvāto valodu par trim mācību programmas paziņojumiem – kursiem, kuriem nepieciešama AI, aizliedz AI klasē un ārpus tās, vai arī ļauj izmantot kādu AI.
“Ja nav šāda paziņojuma, studenti, visticamāk, izmantos šīs tehnoloģijas neatbilstoši,” teikts e -pastā, uzsverot, ka AI “rada jaunu apjukumu par to, kas varētu būt likumīgas metodes studentu darba pabeigšanai”.
Kārnegija Mellona universitātē AI ir bijusi milzīga akadēmiskās atbildības pārkāpumu pieaugums, bet bieži vien studenti nezina, ka ir izdarījuši kaut ko nepareizu, saka Rebekah Fitzsimmons, AI fakultātes konsultēšanas komitejas priekšsēdētājs Universitātes Heinzas Informācijas sistēmu un sabiedriskās politikas koledžā.
For example, one English learner wrote an assignment in his native language and used Deepl, an AI-powered translation tool, to translate his work into English, but didn’t realize that the platform was also changing his language, which was flagged by the AI detector.
Implementing academic integrity policies has been complicated by AI, which is difficult to detect and even harder to prove, Fitzsimmons said. Faculty are allowed flexibility when they believe a student has inadvertently crossed a line, but are now more hesitant to point out wrongdoing because they don’t want to unfairly accuse students, and students worry that if they are falsely accused, there is no way to prove their innocence.
Over the summer, Fitzsimmons helped draft detailed new guidelines for students and faculty that seek to provide more clarity. Faculty have been told that a blanket ban on AI is “not a viable policy” unless instructors make changes to how they teach and assess students. Many faculty are taking exams out of turn. Some have returned to pen-and-paper tests in the classroom, she said, while others have moved to “browsed classes,” where homework is done in class.
Emily DeJeu, who teaches communications courses at Carnegie Mellon Business School, has eliminated writing assignments as homework and replaced them with in-class quizzes taken on laptops in a “lockdown browser” that prevents students from leaving the quiz screen.
“Expecting an 18-year-old to exercise great discipline is unreasonable, so it’s the instructors’ responsibility to put guards in place.”
___
Associated Press education coverage receives financial support from several private foundations. The AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters, and funded coverage areas at ap.org.
