I don't want random techbros coming in, hence why I'm posting on Den. I hope this is ok.

I'm teaching an online composition class this summer. I got two essays from students that cited sources that don't exist. I called them out on it. Here's what happened.

One copped to using Bard, but then sent a second essay that still clearly reeks of gen AI or other horseshit.

The other copped to using a GenAI search engine unwittingly, and has tried to claim they've read things that, by all accounts, they haven't.

Normally, I would have just failed these students for writing hundreds of words on material that doesn't exist. But I really wanted them to go beyond a basic cop and explain their reasons for using this. This is in part since I have administrative duties around GenAI this year in our program. So I wanted to get data for my fellow instructors (i.e. here's what the student did, here's how we can design better assignments that both teach more carefully and also are harder to use GenAI on, etc. etc.) Instead, I've just hit a brick wall from them. They're insisting that it was only a research error, even though by all accounts, these essays shouldn't exist since the majority is written on things that just literally aren't out there.

Again, they wrote about things that don't exist as if they do. That's GenAI in a nutshell. It's some of the most blatant shit. And these students are still trying to justify their work.

What bugs me most, however, isn't the students. It's the fact that technology like this was thrown out into the ether without any fucking guard rails. These students don't realize the problems with it, so they're fucking themselves. And while maybe they would have found some other way to do this kind of lazy work pre-ChatGPT, the accessibility of these LLM models means that more students will do stupid shit like this and fail, instead of trying to learn.

I'm very doomer about this stuff, not because of some AI takeover, but the total enshittification of everything. The citations-needed episode on it was very good on the other serious labor implications as well. However, there's also a ton of potential added labor or shittiness in the affected fields. After all, my instructors will have to work more for the same amount of pay OR just not bother policing it. Either outcome is terrible. While I'm going to do my damndest to try and help my colleagues build assignments that remain rigorous and have guiderails to avoid genAI production, the fact is, eventually it's coming for all of us. And even if it doesn't take our jobs, it's going to make us all more miserable. Because there's not the structures in place for FALGSC or anything. So we're going to lay people off, pay them less, remove some of the most human pursuits, and for what? A bot that's slightly more convenient and less accurate than wikipedia?

I'd love for someone to un-doomer me about this stuff, but it's just very depressing. I needed to vent among friends. Thanks for listening folks.

I'm still a bloomer at heart, but god damn is it hard to keep up in the face of material conditions.

  • ChestRockwell [comrade/them, any]
    hexagon
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    I had those draft checkpoints. After my feedback, instead of coming to office hours, they responded by spooling up the AI material.

    It's really depressing, because I even said in my feedback "you should come to office hours." Like, come talk to me about these half-baked ideas. Instead, they went to the AI to churn out crap.

    I should note, this is a summer online class. So I suspect that contributed a lot as well - they didn't "feel" like they were in class, so the material they submitted was often late and not up to scruff.

    • TrudeauCastroson [he/him]
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      Was their original material you provided feedback on written by themselves?

      If so, that's pretty strange to me. Maybe it indicates they skated by in highschool effortlessly and have no idea how to write better, and instead of trying to write better when given critique they gave up and used AI?

      I feel for you, I have no idea how to make these people want to learn and put effort in either. My major didn't require writing essays and such, but I did have to take some gen-ed classes but I found them pretty interesting.

      I did my essays within the span of 2 days though, and if I cared more about grades and it was available maybe I would've used AI, idk. I had good English marks in highschool, but my university essays were usually C- to B- because I didn't do writing workshops, and I sort of regret not putting in more effort but I was struggling with my main STEM degree focus at the time.

      Online definitely makes it harder to engage people.

      • ChestRockwell [comrade/them, any]
        hexagon
        ·
        10 months ago

        Was their original material you provided feedback on written by themselves?

        Perhaps a mix. The drafts have too little to tell. So my working theory is they just ended up behind the 8 ball and made some questionable choices.