#AI
Interior monologue:
RantWoman, WHY are you posting these comments here on your blog? How about writing nice polite comments to The Princeton Alumni Weekly or to The Daily Princetonian ?
RantWoman, frankly, is livid. A recent survey revealed that 30% of Princeton students admit to having consulted AI when writing exams. As a result, Princeton is ending its LONG tradition of unproctored exams. RantWoman first read of this in Elon's sandbox (Twitter / X). See also BREAKING | Princeton faculty mandate proctoring for in-person exams, upending 133 years of precedent
Previously students have been considered more than adult enough to write their own exams without faculty around to ensure they did not cheat or misbehave. and then to write out and sign the honor code pledge
This custom is ending, and the sample of alumni from RantWoman's era who have opinions are all insulted and affronted and appalled. Several of us are familiar with the practice of open book exams for math and STEM courses but it just never would have occurred to us to cheat on in-class exams.
RantWoman remembers what a jolt it was in graduate school when even very prominent scholars had to sit and babysit the class and give permission to use the restroom. RantWoman is not charmed that this level of babysitting will now be the norm at Princeton.
Long ago, in the mists of the last century, "Even Princeton" appeared on a sign at a student protest about the Vietnam war. This was before RantWoman's time but RantWoman has seen pictures. Now the phrase has come to Princeton as far as students too eager just to let AI do their thinking.
RantWoman has friends who teach at other institutions who report that students try to get away with relying on AI to write papers or exams. This bane to intellectual development is also widely discussed by academic voices in social media streams. RantWoman sometimes has a grant review hat and has seen at least one grant application where AI was so pathetically obvious that all the reviewers just wanted to trash the document.
With mention of Princeton-based AI projects all over the social media RantWoman sees, RantWoman probably should not be surprised that Princeton students are just as eager--and thoughtless--about plunging into AI as everywhere else. RantWoman is still appalled.
RantWoman gets it. AI CAN be very powerful.
AI can also be extremely biased in ways that worsen problems of underrepresentation about both certain categories of people and specific important policy dimensions.
Even the best models cannot embody all of human knowledge unless people actually acquire and create it.
Most important, if humans do not know a subject wellm, how on earth will they catch errors or hallucinations by AI. Never mind needing to be able to think even if, for instance the power goes out.
So yeah, relying on AI to help with tests, to RantWoman, completely devalues a Princeton education and if proctored exams are necessary because people cannot resist consulting it, what a drag!
RantWoman is torn though:
The ability to write exams on a computer is a huge accessibility step both for students and for faculty with accessibility needs. Were this not true, RantWoman would suggest an approach now taking shape in elementary and high schools: lock up devices during the school day for younger students and during class but not breaks and lunch for high school students.
That said, RantWoman is probably going to cease ranting about proctoroed exams and go back to advocacy energy in the direction of skepticism about the huge amount of electricity, water, and other environmental stressors associated with massive data centers. Stay tuned on that front.
.jpg)
