In IHE: Cheating with AI Writing "Nothing to Worry About"
Plus, a SxSW Edu update. Plus, The Score drops more. Plus, Quick Bites.
Issue 159
To subscribe to “The Cheat Sheet,” just enter your e-mail address below:
If you enjoy The Cheat Sheet, please consider chipping in a few bucks via Patreon. And thank you to those who have:
Academic Integrity Policies - I’m starting a review of academic integrity policies, with a focus on remote testing and proctoring, and plagiarism. If you know of an academic integrity policy or practice guide that you think is good or innovative or outstanding in some way and would share it, please do. A reply e-mail reaches me. Thank you.
And thank you to those who’ve sent in policies.
Inside Higher Ed Opens its Pages to Downplay Misconduct Threats. Again.
One of the mysteries I’ve yet to resolve is why Inside Higher Ed (IHE) so consistently downplays or discounts the threats posed by academic misconduct.
A cynic would say that it may be because the publication has, or had, an advertising partnership with a big cheating provider - Course Hero (see Issue 78 or Issue 53). The publication’s podcast last year on academic integrity remains among the most misleading, ill-informed and objectively wrong things I’ve heard (see Issue 49 and Issue 50). There are other examples in Issue 102 and Issue 40.
IHE has done some good reporting on academic integrity too but, at best, their record has too much miss for every occasional hit.
The point is that - for some reason - IHE seems quite eager to reinforce the idea that academic misconduct is nothing to worry about. And so it’s little surprise that we get another “don’t worry about it” offering from the outlet, this time in the form of a contributed piece from a professor at University of Texas, at Austin. The title of the article is literally:
AI-Generated Essays Are Nothing to Worry About
Whew, what a relief.
The author concludes we need not worry after reviewing 22 essays he asked his students to use AI to “write.” Cool. And convincing. Of the fewer than two dozen examples he reviewed, he says:
But, in the end, the essays they turned in were not good. If I had believed these were genuine student essays, the very best would have earned somewhere around a C or C-minus. They minimally fulfilled the assignment requirements, but that’s about it.
Just a reminder, a C or C-minus is passing. I’d wager that any number of students willing to use AI to generate essays would be just fine with a C.
His point is, I guess, that in a sample of 22 AI-inclusive essays, the technology can’t produce A-quality work. Although, the piece continues that, despite many public examples of very high quality AI-generated writing, those are unusual because:
In many of these cases, the “authors” have access to higher-quality language models than most students are currently able to use.
Oh. So, it’s not impossible - it’s just that students can’t access the better AI tools yet. That’s comforting because it’s not as if technology ever gets better or becomes more widely available.
The piece goes on to say that the best writers tend to do better at guiding the AI, producing better products, and that:
All in all, this exercise tells us we are not on the verge of receiving a flood of algorithmically generated student submissions. It’s just too much work to cheat that way.
Too much work? I don’t even understand that point. It’s almost always easier to do the assignment, yet students cheat all the time. No cheating student ever says, ‘well it would just be easier to study.’ That’s literally the reason they are cheating - because that’s not the choice they are considering. Seriously.
And finally, our hakuna matata author says:
the best defense against AI essays is the same as the best defense against essay repositories—a good assignment sheet.
Come on. Essay repositories? Like that’s the problem?
Does anyone think paid essay mills that sell custom writing assignments aren’t already using AI - and the good stuff? That “a good assignment sheet” is “the best defense” is bonkers. That’s not a serious position, is it? It can’t be.
But for Inside Higher Ed, it seems it is. Telling everyone that we have “nothing to worry about.” Again.
The Score Podcast Drops New, Extended Episode(s)
The Score, the outstanding podcast on academic integrity by veteran education writer Kathryn Baron, released a double-episode last month. The new editions are interviews with Kylie Day, manager of exams and e-assessments at University of New England, in Australia, and Sarah Thorneycroft, director of digital education at UNE.
Like all episodes of The Score, these are worth a listen. Here are a few highlights.
From Episode 9, in discussing why UNE uses remote proctors for their online exams, Thorneycroft explains simply:
This is where it's really useful to help people make comparisons between the paper examination paradigm in which somebody is watching them, and often in more embodied ways of walking up and down and patrolling the physical room that people are located in. But we've also discovered, because online the proctor and student relationship is one to one, whereas in an exam hall it's one to many. Yes, that proctor is watching because that's the cultural condition for examinations that we've agreed on regardless of where they're held.
Earlier, Day explains part of the school’s philosophy in investing in monitoring for misconduct:
In the same way that the highway patrol police are not expected to catch every single person who might speed, they have a presence and that serves a purpose to make it risky, to dissuade people from speeding.
Both points are pretty uncomplicated.
The shows are worth your time.
SxSW Edu Update
In Issue 144, I asked readers to vote for some events for the 2023 SxSW Edu conference and to vote disapprovingly for some other proposals, those promoted by or featuring cheating companies.
Recently, SxSW released their first wave of approved events and it appears that none of those with cheating providers made the initial cut. At least as far as I can tell. That’s great news. Thank you.
None of the integrity-aligned proposals made the first cut either, it seems. And while that’s disappointing, it’s not too surprising as no one wants to talk about cheating, especially in the United States. Not ever.
The bottom line is that, as of now, SxSW Edu will take a pass on academic misconduct entirely - neither blindly promoting it nor helping people understand and address it. In context, that’s probably a win.
Great Stuff from Wilfrid Laurier
Students at Wilfrid Laurier University (CAN) published this really good piece on academic misconduct. Other colleges should - with permission, of course - steal it.
And this bit in particular:
Some contract cheating websites prey on anxious students searching online for help by disguising themselves as tutoring websites, offering homework assistance, exam and test preparation, writing support and on-call experts. They require payment of either a monthly fee or uploads of course material in order to access their content. Both obtaining and uploading course material are considered forms of academic misconduct
I also love that it includes ways to get help. It’s great.
“The Cheat Sheet” Quick Bites
The Internet is abuzz over these “cheating masks” that teachers in The Philippines asked students to make and wear. Even the Washington Post could not resist the temptation, with photos. Personally, I think the idea takes an elementary view of cheating. But I also think that anything that raises the idea that misconduct happens and encourages active deterrence is probably good. Either way, it’s fun.
Also in The Philippines, authorities say they caught a case of test impersonation - in a licensure test for teachers. Yes, teachers.
Authorities in India say 40 examinees have been arrested for trying to use Bluetooth technology to cheat on a constable exam. Gangs sold the cheating services. Anyway, cheating on a police exam. Good stuff.
In Ethiopia, in an attempt to reduce cheating, authorities are bussing 12th grade students and various supervising teachers to outlying universities to take national exams. They hope this will mitigate cheating via stolen exams which the papers says “has been common.”
A school in Jamaica is under inquiry after the principal there is accused of helping students cheat on the Caribbean Secondary Education Certificate Examinations.