It seems the main problem we are trying to solve with writing is communication of ideas in a coherant fashion.
There will be a few different types of Students using chatGPT. Those blatantly cheating and just turning in blindly these works.
Those who have a hard time putting their ideas to page, but when asked can talk through their ideas.
A third group may arise, those who cheat blatantly, but then parrot what they used.
What am I saying here though, oral exams will separate these groups. Identifying what group the pupil is in helps understand how to actually help them progress.
My bias for this idea comes from my mother is a retired college professor and gave oral exams for two decades with large success in weeding out those who couldn't formulate ideas of their own.
ChatGPT has no implications for high-school English classes, if they are taught properly - ie, with the goal of teaching English literature and composition. If they're taught with the goal of assigning grades to students, then sure, ChatGPT could be a problem.
In high school we could pay the smart kid or someone’s older sibling to write a paper for you.
ChatGPT is amazing but getting someone else to do your work is not novel.
I’m also quite certain schools will implement an AI-detection mechanism, and wouldn’t be surprised if OpenAI were to expose that as a product offering.
I think you might be coming from a different socioeconomic perspective. The legions of C and B students would suggest that most kids do not have the means to buy someone else’s work.
As for the viability of an ai detector, if a human can’t recognize the difference in a fundamentally human dataset (language) there is no reason to suspect ML would be better suited to it. A watermarking scheme would be more effective.
I went to school in a lower income urban center. I think you underestimate the barter economy of lower income students in high schools. Money is not commonly used to trade. There are a lot of favors changing hands.
We used to trade bags of weed for student metro cards. Others trade lunch tickets for homework. I saw a student hand over their north face jacket and a cell phone to have someone else to take an AP exam for them. They later told their parents they were robbed on the way home.
As Jeff gold bloom would say: “life uhhh… finds a way.”
Re: watermarking, it’s exactly what I alluded to by “OpenAI May even expose this as a product.”
In some sense, yes - evaluation in high school math, physics, and similar quantitative fields has been reduced to proctored problem sets. Even in so-called advanced classes, this has come at a cost. Evaluations rarely assess creativity, independent reasoning, or even a non-trivial proof - because every problem must be part of a strictly time-limited problem set, with no space for real challenge or even a few hours of thought.
To date, writing has evaded this trap. Sure, students write short essays during timed exams, but they also wrestle with more complex ideas and topics in longer assignments. Those assignments often take days, or even weeks, to do well.
I’m not sure what the future of those longer assignments is. I’m a bit disturbed by the idea that reading widely, thinking deeply, and distilling a few pages of coherent thoughts may not be an important part of early education. (Schools don’t always teach this well today, but at least we expect them to try.)
Schools don’t teach it well because of no child left behind - how you write for a test is very different from how you’d write in a more literary or journalistic context.
There will be a few different types of Students using chatGPT. Those blatantly cheating and just turning in blindly these works.
Those who have a hard time putting their ideas to page, but when asked can talk through their ideas.
A third group may arise, those who cheat blatantly, but then parrot what they used.
What am I saying here though, oral exams will separate these groups. Identifying what group the pupil is in helps understand how to actually help them progress.
My bias for this idea comes from my mother is a retired college professor and gave oral exams for two decades with large success in weeding out those who couldn't formulate ideas of their own.