To the editor: Here is the foolproof, low-tech solution to AI cheating for college exams: Go back to how we used to do it before computers — let alone AI — existed (“Inside college AI cheating wars: extreme surveillance, false accusations, jarring confusion,” June 12). Require all students to show up in person to the classroom with an empty “blue book” and write their exam answers in cursive. No previous exposure to the exam questions would be given and the exam would be proctored to make sure phones could not be used to help with answers. Not only would this assure there would be no use of AI, it would also require all students to show they have learned and mastered cursive writing. Two birds with one stone!
No more “cheating” with AI, no more clumsy attempts to monitor student behavior via online interaction. This would not solve the issue of writing term papers, where students may still employ AI for citations, data and content. This may be one of those areas where new AI technology will offer solutions for assessing students’ ability to produce a coherent document.
Steven Hendlin, Newport Beach
..
To the editor: I really appreciate the article in Sunday’s paper about trust in colleges and universities eroding over the use of AI. I especially appreciate that the article concludes with this comment from Tricia Bertram Gallant, UC San Diego’s academic integrity director: “This fantasy that we can grant degrees based solely on unsupervised, unobserved work has finally, maybe, come to an end.”
With all of the research and hand-wringing over the mental health and social disconnectedness of the generation coming of age right now, it seems like a no-brainer that students should be learning and tested in the most authentic setting possible. Unless the class is fully online, why on Earth wouldn’t a college or university professor think to mandate in-person proctored midterms and finals? It shouldn’t be too much to ask.
If we want the degree, and quite frankly the in-person college experience, to mean something, all stakeholders need to actually show up for it.
Jennifer Enani, Los Angeles
..
To the editor: AI has overturned the myth that highly paid professors in ivory towers are the main dispensers of knowledge. Knowledge is now accessible to everyone. I’m reminded of the origins of Protestantism, when Christians decided they no longer needed the pope to communicate with God.
What I learned from a liberal education is that wisdom is necessary in order to synthesize its meaning for our everyday lives. That’s the link between knowledge and wisdom. College professors need to understand that in order to avoid obsolescence.
Jim Johnson, Hemet
..
To the editor: The answer to the AI cheating issue detailed on the Sunday front page is on page A12, with Cathy Bussewitz’s article about “distinctly human” skills (“Five human skills AI still can’t match — and why they could save your job,” June 11). The skills: empathy, nurturing bonds, critical thinking, having a conscience and making judgment calls.
Education is no longer about recalling facts; education can explore, exercise and test those uniquely human qualities.
Pattie Porter Firestone, Santa Barbara
