Princeton Will Supervise Exams For First Time In 133 Years Because of AI (the-independent.com) 43
An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Independent: Princeton University will soon require exams to be supervised for the first time in 100 years -- all thanks to students using artificial intelligence to cheat. For 133 years, the Ivy League school's honor code allowed students to take exams without a professor present, but on Monday, faculty voted to require proctoring for all in-person exams starting this summer. A "significant" number of undergraduate students and faculty requested the change, "given their perception that cheating on in-class exams has become widespread," the college's dean, Michael Gordin, wrote in a letter, according to The Wall Street Journal.
Princeton's honor system dates back to 1893, when students petitioned to eliminate proctors -- or an impartial person to supervise students -- during examinations, according to the school's newspaper, The Daily Princetonian. The honor code has long been a point of pride for Princeton. However, artificial intelligence and cellphones have made it easier for students to cheat -- and even harder for others to spot, Gordin wrote. Despite the changes to the policy, Princeton will still require students to state: "I pledge my honor that I have not violated the Honor Code during this examination," according to the Journal.
Students are also more reluctant to report cheating, according to the policy proposal. Students are more likely now to anonymously report cheating due to fears of "doxxing or shaming among their peer groups" online, the proposal says, according to the school newspaper. Under the new guidelines, instructors will be present during exams to act "as a witness to what happens," but are instructed not to interfere with students. If a suspected honor code infraction occurs, they will report it to a student-run honor committee for adjudication.
Princeton's honor system dates back to 1893, when students petitioned to eliminate proctors -- or an impartial person to supervise students -- during examinations, according to the school's newspaper, The Daily Princetonian. The honor code has long been a point of pride for Princeton. However, artificial intelligence and cellphones have made it easier for students to cheat -- and even harder for others to spot, Gordin wrote. Despite the changes to the policy, Princeton will still require students to state: "I pledge my honor that I have not violated the Honor Code during this examination," according to the Journal.
Students are also more reluctant to report cheating, according to the policy proposal. Students are more likely now to anonymously report cheating due to fears of "doxxing or shaming among their peer groups" online, the proposal says, according to the school newspaper. Under the new guidelines, instructors will be present during exams to act "as a witness to what happens," but are instructed not to interfere with students. If a suspected honor code infraction occurs, they will report it to a student-run honor committee for adjudication.
Funny (Score:5, Funny)
Jokes on them, the students have been cheating for 133 years.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Funny (Score:5, Insightful)
People used to care about their reputation. A person's given word was more than a joke.
I was going to say... (Score:3, Informative)
A graduate was hired into our small company to write software and I was training him. I went to our boss and told him that this new guy didn't know what I'd expect a hardware engineering graduate to know. I was hoping that he would terminate him or assign him to something else, but nothing happened.
Straight out of "Dilbert", our boss eventually retired and the remaining PHBs, who didn't kno
Re: (Score:2)
Sounds like he won.
Re: (Score:1)
Correct. What you stated largely corresponds to what was stated in the official White House readout.
Now, go read the official Chinese statement [fmprc.gov.cn] released after the summit. I'll wait.
You're gullible to the point where I wish I had a bridge to sell.
Cheat sheets (Score:4, Insightful)
The second best protection is to allow students to prepare an index card ahead of time and put whatever they want on it. It really works for getting them to focus on the test, to remember material, and to spend time, effort and thought on it.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes. With companies declaring that they're going to replace most jobs with LLMs it seems weird that universities would be telling students they can't use them.
The entire university system is broken and they haven't yet come to terms with that.
Re:Cheat sheets (Score:5, Insightful)
It is more like that people teaching at universities know what their responsibilities are and can see a hype for what it is. Example: To competently review code written by an LLM (which is absolutely critical), you need to be on a level above the complexity level of the task and the solution you review. Code review is harder than writing that code. But if you do not educate anybody that can do it or will eventually be able to, then there will be nobody that can review it in 10 or 20 years. The whole thing is the completely dumb short-term thinking that we have come to expect from C-level "decision makers". All it will do is reduce skill levels of western engineers even more and at some time the tech dominance will be completely over. That process has been running for a while, but LLMs are an accelerator.
Obviously, people that are excellent engineers will always find good jobs. The human race has not enough of them even if we find every last person with the potential. But anybody more in the average range will suffer. And a lot of low-skill "paper pusher" jobs will vanish, because specialized (not general) LLMs can very likely do many of them.
That said, I could do exams that allow LLMs. In fact, one software security course I teach has exactly that: They get a number of tasks in groups and hand in their results to be graded. But there is a post-discussion and when they have no clue abut what they handed in, their grades go down, including the possibility to fail the task. Results are pretty good.
Re: (Score:1)
Not sure - its like the argument with calculators as far as arithmetic and even some basic math goes.
You may not be able to multiple 146 *13 easily but when your calculator spits back 1898, if you have some number sense you instantly can tell that is reasonable therefore probably accurate; because you do know you can multiply 150 * 10 and add 450 to that, which should be near. Same thing if you ask a computer for a definite integration or something you can estimate the value as if the slope were 45 or some
Re: (Score:1)
Re:Cheat sheets (Score:5, Interesting)
I do not give my students LLMs or Internet search. But I give them "as much paper as you want with whatever you want on it". I have gotten feedback from students quite often now, that preparing that paper was really good exam preparation and also made them actually revisit and really understand the subjects. So very much not just exam preparation but actual learning and understanding of things. In addition, if somebody finds some exam question not to clear, I answer questions about the exam questions during the exam. I also give a generous amount of time.
And yes, it does make grading a lot more effort, especially as I do not do multiple-choice questions and I do accept answers that are well thought out but do not match what I think. But, in the end, good teaching requires motivation to do good teaching and that means not trying to make things too easy on myself. I am very much aware of the multiplication factor my teaching has and the responsibility towards my students and society that comes with. I am also aware that quite a few people do teaching "just as a job" and do not realize the multiplication factor or their responsibility towards students and society. In teaching, same as in many other things (like leadership positions), the human race remains incompetent at selecting the best people for the job or even only selecting good people consistently.
Professor present? (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
There isn't even an optometrist in the office when I go to get new glasses... it's telehealth crap. (they say it's because not enough people want to be optometrists)
This sounds like what school used to be like... at best, we had a TI-83+ in math class, the other classes were what we learned from the teacher and book.
Re: One company is all I have to list (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
How are they going to get a professor present as a proctor? It's hard enough to get one to show up for class.
Depends on the course, of course, but TA's are still a thing in many larger courses that could be used to supply the proctoring staff.
Only takes a few to mess things up (Score:5, Insightful)
A relatively small number of dishonorable and dishonest egoists is all to takes to mess things up. Same as in basically every aspect of life.
Re: (Score:2)
A relatively small number of dishonorable and dishonest egoists is all to takes to mess things up. Same as in basically every aspect of life.
Summarize to: "And this is why we can't have nice things".
Re: (Score:2)
If you expect honor and integrity you are in the wrong century.
We used to be in a society where people smiled or acknowledged people they walk past. Now it's little ants treating everyone else as obstacles in the way as they walk down the path with a phone stuck to their nose.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Eventually, cheaters get caught. It may take years, but it happens.
And it doesn't work out well for them. Unless, apparently, they run for public office.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed. If you go for a career where you need to have actual skills, cheating is a really bad idea. If your main skill is bullshit, lying and grandstanding, then cheating is part of your education.
The one thing I cannot get over is how bad average people are at selecting leaders.
Re: (Score:2)
Well. I tech mostly IT Security and these students may be different. While I have a class where they hand in homework for the grades, I do result-discussion with all groups and if they have no clue, they fail that one. Has not been an issue so far. For written exams, they can bring as much paper as they like, but no AI.
If what you teach is more about voicing and exploring ideas and not about hard reasoning (in engineering, your solution does not work if not carefully constructed), LLM use would be a massive
Whew (Score:3)
Class of '26, in before proctors!
This is a temporary adaptation (Score:2)
It is trying to make the old system work in the new technological world
Education needs major reform
Imagine an AI tutor perfectly matched to a student's talents and learning speed, supplemented by a human teacher.
There would be no need for exams as the AI tutor would constantly assess the student's progress and adjust the teaching as necessary
Imagine learning physics from a virtual Einstein or Feynman
Re: (Score:3)
Imagine an AI tutor perfectly matched to a student's talents and learning speed, supplemented by a human teacher.
Ok, I'm imagining a class of high school students breaking the guardrails, getting it to report that they're doing brilliantly and deserve A+ while they watch tiktok... at the very least they'll make it say racist things and publish that on tiktok for the lulz. It'll also find a way to organically mention how much its been hearing that everyone else really likes new Pepsi Cherry Zero on a daily basis too.
Is that not the outcome you were imagining too?
Imagine learning physics from a virtual Einstein or Feynman
Oooh... yes please, i can't wait for virtual Feyman prefa
Why schools need to change given tech changes (Score:2)
Princeton alumnus here (undergrad, staff, grad, and later for a time townie and tigernet user). I agree things need to change -- and using AI as a tutor is a great option for some situations (even as doing that prevents the strengthening of human communities through human interactions).
A couple essays I wrote on that, the first from 2007 focusing mostly on K-12:
https://patapata.sourceforge.n... [sourceforge.net]
"Ultimately, educational technology's greatest value is in supporting "learning on demand" based on interest or nee
What the.... ?? (Score:2)
Every exam I took in university was supervised. And while I did graduate quite a while ago, it wasn't 133 years ago.
Re: (Score:2)
Every exam I took in university was supervised. And while I did graduate quite a while ago, it wasn't 133 years ago.
Same here, though I strongly suspect it was before you graduated - the first HP scientific calculator came out in my senior year, and nearly caused a riot in one of my classes because one of the students bought one and it was a LOT faster than the slide rules everyone else was using.
Anyway, I recall a few open-book exams, but mostly you were on your own. My physics 101 prof was pissed off at the class because hardly anyone was doing the homework, so he announced that everyone's final grade would be based en
Trust is wishful thinking (Score:2)
Honor unreciprocated is a self-inflicted vulnerability which begs abuse. It's pathetically naive to pretend otherwise. Even coercive strategies like omerta in traditional organized crime are easily broken.
Honor does not scale. There is no benefit in wasting it on the unworthy.