Relentless advancement to produce new gen of 
seppos
I asked Wendy if I could read the paper she turned in, and when I opened the document, I was surprised to see the topic: critical pedagogy, the philosophy of education pioneered by Paulo Freire. The philosophy examines the influence of social and political forces on learning and classroom dynamics. Her opening line: “To what extent is schooling hindering students’ cognitive ability to think critically?” Later, I asked Wendy if she recognized the irony in using AI to write not just a paper on critical pedagogy but one that argues learning is what “makes us truly human.” She wasn’t sure what to make of the question. “I use AI a lot. Like, every day,” she said. “And I do believe it could take away that critical-thinking part. But it’s just — now that we rely on it, we can’t really imagine living without it.”
Yeah, you can’t give students a done-at-home essay as an assessment any longer, that’s just asking for AI slop and setting the students up for failure. Students can’t be trusted to avoid the temptation of AI, even the good ones from time to time. Over the past couple of years I’ve had to completely rethink every assessment I give. Essays are useless now. In-class tests and exams are ok, but students struggle with these more than they did a few years ago as they are less practiced at thinking through the written word. In-class presentations work pretty well, if you have a few restrictions. Keeping the time limits short so they stay focused and do not use vague and verbose AI writing helps, limiting the amount of text in slides or number or slides or even just banning slides entirely can also help to reduce slop. But most importantly, have a lengthy question and answer period at the end. This is where the students will actually demonstrate their own understanding as they need to actually know the material themselves to get through even very simple questions. If a student only used AI to write a presentation script even “what did you think about the book?” is a tough question for them. Usually one of the students will try using AI but will very visibly crash and burn in front of the whole class during the Q&A. The public shaming that results usually serves as a good warning to the rest.
Yeah and also the question is "what did you think of the book?" Is super subjective. "It was informative I guess? What part of the book do you want me to address?"
Yeah that’s the idea, to get them to show their own thoughts about it.
It was pretty cool I guess.
Wow I learned so much.
And if they give vague non-answers like that you press them for details. What was so cool about it, what were some of the things you learnt, etc.
Alright, I see what you're going for. Sorry for being snippy.
I think it might be part of me being on the spectrum where I get antsy around any sort of ambiguity.
Any form of assessment has this issue regarding whichever medium happens to be employed. That why you generally need a few different types of assessments and not just one big one.
We always bullshit essays. We were no better. Homework was always capitlaist bs.
In the real world of I look up and answer I am an overachiever at my job. While AI doesn't contribute to that skills the standard Prussian education model doesn't either