Shelley says he is convinced the majority of the 288 students in his health-care law course cheated on their April 24 final exam using AI.

“I had eight per cent of my class receive 100 per cent on the multiple choice. Fifty-five per cent scored over 90 per cent. I’ve never seen marks like that in 20 years of teaching,”

The tenured professor, who has spent 10 years at the London, Ont., university, says he decided not to use proctoring software because he believes it does not prevent cheating.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] brianpeiris@lemmy.ca 22 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (5 children)

Yeah, it's wild to me that a professor would trust their students to do this online without any proctoring in any age. I can understand why he might not have wanted to use proctoring software, if they are easily circumvented. I guess the correct option -- in-person proctoring via contracted companies, is just too resource-intensive.

The main difference is still AI though. Even if students cheated in the past, they would have had to flip through their textbook or their notes, and know where to find the answer, then put it in their own words. Now they don't even have to do that small amount of work to cheat.

It's nuts to think that these are 3rd year health-science undergrads who will soon be out there in the world having only learned an over-reliance on AI.

[–] TheHonourablePierrePoilievre@lemmy.ca 1 points 8 hours ago

The students are placed in a position where it would be stupid not to cheat. Even someone who was legitimately working to learn the material would be only hurting themselves to take an honest B+ when an A+ is on the table by double checking their answers.

[–] Auli@lemmy.ca 5 points 18 hours ago

And that is going to be the future. Nobody can make a decision without their AI. Hell I am falling into the trap using AI in stead of search.

[–] BigJohnnyHines@lemmy.ca 2 points 15 hours ago

A lot of schools and universities don’t allow their teachers or professors to choose the learning platforms. Half of the AI problems in education are solved with old school exams on paper but the people making decisions are easily influenced/bribed by tech assholes.

[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 6 points 1 day ago (2 children)

It’s nuts to think that these are 3rd year health-science undergrads who will soon be out there in the world having only learned an over-reliance on AI.

What is insane is these assholes are getting into medical school. In a few years, you'll have to ask your doctor how many Rs are in Strawberry.

[–] kent_eh@lemmy.ca 1 points 16 hours ago

What is insane is these assholes are getting into medical school.

Q: What do you call the person who graduated bottom of their class at medical school?

A: Doctor.

[–] definitemaybe@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

But they're not going to pass medical school, at least.

A huge waste of money and time, of course, but there are checks and balances on professions.

And good luck passing a job interview if they never learned anything in school because they cheated the whole way through. And, even if they do land a job, almost every job has something like a 3-month probation. You can't take it with AI professionally, if anyone's paying attention.

[–] NannerBanner@literature.cafe 4 points 1 day ago

You'd be surprised about the passing of medical school... also at what an interview for someone applying for a job after getting a degree where they'd be taking health science law. Add in that many jobs need only a smidgen of the knowledge you learned at school, and the rest is trained, they'll pass the 3 month probation. It sucks, but it'll happen.

[–] MyBrainHurts@piefed.ca 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I keep thinking back to Idiocracy, where machine just had pictographic buttons... We're almost there folks!

[–] KelvarCherry@piefed.blahaj.zone 2 points 1 day ago

Who needs pictographic buttons when you can have AI models coax them through every step?