AI使用导致加州大学伯克利分校数学教授认为批改作业"毫无意义"
AI use leads UC Berkeley math professor to see 'no point' in grading homework

原始链接: https://www.dailycal.org/news/campus/academics/ai-use-leads-uc-berkeley-math-professor-to-see-no-point-in-grading-homework/article_bdf1eae2-c08b-491f-b9f1-81a7cea177de.html

加州大学伯克利分校教授、菲尔兹奖得主理查德·博彻兹因学生使用AI,不再按正确性批改作业,改为按完成情况批改。在OpenAI声称AI智能体解决了纳维-斯托克斯问题后,他警告AI可能很快超越人类数学家,并表示不确定如何给学生提供建议。他还指出学术惰性可能延缓变革。加州大学伯克利分校将AI政策交由教师自行制定,因课程而异,并发现检测工具不足;现有示例声明可供参考。

一篇 Hacker News 帖子讨论了加州大学伯克利分校一位数学教授的说法,即 AI 使得批改作业变得毫无意义。评论者就作业是否应该计分展开了辩论。有些人描述了只有期末考试计分的体系,主张作业应作为练习或强制但不计分;另一些人则说计分的作业有助于缺乏自主动力的学生并提供早期反馈。AI 被视为加速了现有的作弊行为并取消了渐进式学习的激励,尽管许多人仍认为课堂考试是有意义的。更广泛的评论质疑高等教育的目的、雇主培训以及翻转课堂。总体而言,参与者意见不一,但许多人认为 AI 正在将评估推向课堂或基于考试的评价。
相关文章

原文

Richard Borcherds, a UC Berkeley professor and Fields medalist, no longer grades his students’ homework. 

After seeing how many of his students used AI to consistently receive top scores, he felt there was “no point” in paying readers to grade for correctness in homework, as AI use is now unavoidable. 

Borcherds revealed this in a sit-down interview Tuesday, following OpenAI’s announcement that AI agents apparently solved one of mathematics’ most difficult unsolved problems, the Navier-Stokes existence and smoothness problem.

“If AI continues to improve at present rate, then, in a few years, there’ll be nothing human mathematicians can do that AI can’t do better,” Borcherds said. 

Borcherds said he currently grades on completion if a student hands in their homework. He admitted that it is “not a very good system,” but at the moment, he has no alternative.

Borcherds stated he no longer knows whether to encourage students to go into the math department, as it seemed five years ago that being a mathematician was one of the safest careers from the AI boom.

“I have no idea what to advise. I even asked ChatGPT this exact question, and even ChatGPT said it didn’t have any idea what was going to happen,” Borcherds said. 

He described a plentiful amount of “inertia” in the academic system and said he wouldn’t be surprised if things stayed the same in the math department for a couple years despite AI developments. 

He drew a comparison to physical paper journals, which publish even though they have been “utterly pointless” for two decades. 

“There have been plenty of technical breakthroughs in the past — hand weaving was put out of business by looms, and horses were put out of business by motor cars, and so on,” Borcherds said. “This is the first time anything like this has happened in mathematics, though.”

The Berkeley Division of the Academic Senate asks that faculty include a statement about course expectations including the use of AI tools for coursework in course syllabi, according to an email from Anne Marie Richard, assistant vice provost for undergraduate education and chief academic technology officer. However, she said the direct policies on AI use can vary dramatically with course level and focus area. 

Campus has tried several AI detection tools, including Turnitin and Rumi, but have determined that these tools aren’t adequate enough to be standardized on campus.

AI policy for classes is up to the discretion of faculty, but there is a growing database of sample AI use statements available in the AI Hub, the campus directory for AI tools, training and policies, for faculty to use in their syllabi, according to Richard. 

联系我们 contact @ memedata.com