Education has not recently been the main reason for college for most majors anyway - more about connections and networking- not the actual classes.
Outside of the skilled professions like medical, engineering, law etc
Iâm doing a partially asynchronous masters program right now, and it is pretty insane how easy it would be to cheat on everything now. Cheating used to take as much effort as learning the things sometimes, now itâs really just copy-paste.
Tests and stuff are still proctored and a little more monitored though.
funny and existentially devastating read
As much as I hate to agree, seems that would be huge jumps for both of them.
Youâd think so, but at this point I donât think the Universities actually care yet. Brown apparently just had a big AI cheating scandal and no one seems to have noticed.
So, a year and a half ago, I coached HS track at STAB which does a solid job of sending its kids to good schools. Theyâre smart kids whoâs parents generally hold them accountable for how they do, and have high expectations.
After a while, the kids start viewing you as furniture or whatever and forget youâre there and talk casually about stuff, right? Something I noticed is that the kids would obviously talk about how they did on exams and stuff, and the non-STEM kids would almost universally do badly on the exams in Math and Science classes. Which isnât that weird, theyâre the non-STEM kids.
But what struck me as weird was the non-STEM kids always did well on their homework and take-home assignments. Then theyâd do badly on the in-class exams and NOT COMPLAIN ABOUT IT. Like, kids getting 100% on their homework and A-s on the take-home stuff would then get a Cs on the exams and, rather than complaining about the exam being hard or the teacher being a tough grader, would just totally take it in stride like they expected it.
After a while, I realized it was because zero of those kids were actually doing their homework or takehome exams, they had ChatGPT or whatever doing it for them. They were relieved to get C-s on the in-class exams. I was talking about it with a buddy whoâs a CS professor at Oberlin and he said it had been years since it was even plausible his students actually did their homework.
Education is substantially more fucked than society has come to grips with.
I wonder what Prof. Louis Bloomfield wouldâve done.
His analytics were otherworldly for a freshman not in that top group. Heâs absolutely going to be in the top 25 and itâs not that crazy. A lot of analytics and places had him better than Thijs
Chance at 24!
Final UVa rankings:
53 - GrĂźnloh
26 - TDR
24 - Chance
Opponents:
MARYLAND:
HM - Tomislav Buljan
93 - Payne
UCONN
34 - Mullins
31 - Hines
8 - Demary
KENTUCKY
68 - Zoom Diallo
54 - Moreno
15 - Momcilovic
ARKANSAS (?)
84 - Jeremiah Wilkinson
72 - Billy Richmond III
17 - Jordan Smith Jr.
MARQUETTE
56 - Fru
38 - Nigel James
XAVIER
HM - Chance Westry
DUKE
96 - Sarr
82 - Ruben Boumtje Boumtjeâs kid
73 - Cayden Boozer
13 - Ngongba
7 - Blackwell
UNC
HM - Terrence Brown
88 - Neo
MIAMI
57 - Somto Cyril
49 - Shelton Henderson
40 - Acaden Lewis
VPI
81 - Hansberry
LOUISVILLE
55 - Shelstead
4 - Bidunga
I didnât check other ACC opponentsâŚ
Nbogba over TDR is dumbfounding to me. This is not an NBA draft itâs a college ranking
Have a hard time believing there are 100 players better than Sam, so we should have 4.
I donât understand how a returning ACC starter (from a 30 win team!) who is 6â6â and averaged > 10 points on 40% from 3 isnât one of the top 100 players in CBB
Quibble away (I of all people wonât stop yaâŚ) but we got 3 guys in the top 53.
Pretty clear they leaned heavily into the advanced analytics. Why our three guys are higher than we fans would expect, and why Sam isnât included. Also explains a lot of the other placements from the teams haney listed.
We fans have no one else to blame for this but ourselves. It is our demand for content that forces media outlets to release these lists, and such lists released in mid July are going to be less than merely suspect. They are nearly pointless. Nonetheless, fans on college basketball forums across the country will be preening or complaining about the placement of their teamâs players. It is what it is. Go âHoos!!!
Cheating is nothing new, even at UVA. The amount of cheating that has gone on in the Comm School prereq classes is wild. The big Econ/Accounting classes probably have >50% of kids cheating in some way. Elzinga literally made no effort to prevent kids from cheating.
Iâm a liberal arts grad and liked that you couldnât really cheat or hide. There wasnât a right answer or formula or anything. Everything was a paper where you had to do your own analysis. AI is definitely making it more possible to cheat in liberal arts now that it can actually do the work for you, but many people have been cheating in STEM classes for decades.
This is a really bold claim and not at all supported by my experience in these classes not that long ago
As a friend â and former TA â to Ken I find this borderline outrageous. I know for a FACT the TAs for Econ 201 are studious about administering exams, and grading them. He is a man of high integrity, and does not blow off educational standards, just cuz. Iâm not certain what your evidence of this is beyond a TA here and there who cared less than they shouldâve.
New DHS rule with implications for international athletes looking to take advantage of 5-in-5 (and many nonathletes): F/J visa students are limited to 4 years in the US before they have to apply for an extension, rather than just the end of their program.
Linked that one because the news stories are paywalled or low quality, and Cornellâs guidance was pretty readable and non-partisan.
if true, professors need to use ai to fight back. use ai to develop a test that is different for everyone then have ai grade it. develop essay questions that are designed to be open book, open notes, then use AI to check for plagiarism. there are ways to reduce cheating. probably cannot eliminate it but make it hard enough to deter most.