Are we on the slippery slope?

[N0bodyOfTheGoat]

Chris Rea and Mr T will save us!

 

[Fastpedaller]

@Fastpedaller - your daughter's colleagues are incorrect here. As someone who does a lot of investigations and holds meetings regarding student submissions her university's regulations are likely to have an academic integrity process.

That means there is likely to be a viva held where the student is invited to defend whatever piece of work they have submitted. I chaired one this week. Given I'm public about where I work it's not appropriate for me to state the outcome.

It's academic who, imho, can't be bothered with the effort that are simply passing / failing the work AND giving us a bad name. She's right to stand her ground and defend the grades given.

Another example.... A student was shadowing various staff for several weeks as part of her training. She was repeatedly cautioned because of inappropriate comments she had made in the presence of patients. Four members of staff met with the student's Uni representative (with the student present) and unanimously gave the opinion that the student needed more training and hadn't met the required standard. The Uni rep refused to accept the situation and said the student should continue. It would seem some of the Unis are attempting to retain any student because the unis are struggling financially? My Daughter has refused any future students from this particular Uni (this was the 3rd with poor performance/attitude). No wonder the NHS is struggling.

 

[DCLane]

@Fastpedaller - it's more an Office for Students aspect, given there is a percentage target for continuation, i.e. passing the year / completing, for students. If any year of any course falls below that percentage, and it's a high one at 75%, and all aspects of the university are under investigation.

As a result of a government target there is pressure to pass everyone. Pass rates are under scrutiny, rather than the students and staff, with those responsible for marking questioned when pass rates fall below a certain level. As a result it's easier to give a bare pass mark than fail a poor / questionable piece of work.

Me? I prefer to challenge the questioners and demonstrate what I've delivered, together with how standards are upheld, but that can be tiring.

Just passing them is a short-term approach which will come back to bite those who just give a grade. Students learn which institutions are just handing out grades, we as academics know and graduates don't get decent jobs. There's a subsequent graduate survey which also has a government target for graduates being in a graduate-level role: some of those institutions haven't a hope of meeting that target.

 

[Dadam]

The largest of many issues with generative AI is that it's constantly scouring the internet for content, and the content available is increasingly AI generated in the first place. So the slop is being recycled and used to generate more slop. It's pissing in it's own well so to speak.
I'm not anti AI by any means. My employer is working with the NHS on applications like early diagnosis of serious conditions from radiology images and pathology slides. It doesn't replace the skilled clinicians, it can screen far more people than manual processes and allows more efficient use of the time of experienced clinical staff. Instead of spending 99% of the time looking at clear/normal images, they can target the ones which are identified as possibly cancerous.

 

[Fastpedaller]

The largest of many issues with generative AI is that it's constantly scouring the internet for content, and the content available is increasingly AI generated in the first place. So the slop is being recycled and used to generate more slop. It's pissing in it's own well so to speak.
I'm not anti AI by any means. My employer is working with the NHS on applications like early diagnosis of serious conditions from radiology images and pathology slides. It doesn't replace the skilled clinicians, it can screen far more people than manual processes and allows more efficient use of the time of experienced clinical staff. Instead of spending 99% of the time looking at clear/normal images, they can target the ones which are identified as possibly cancerous.

I'm also not anti- AI....... If tech is used in a beneficial way (as the example above), that is great. My concern is that 'basic skills' will be lost along with a huge dis-benefit. Going back to an example cited earlier "calculators used in exams" can indeed put focus on the method required to achieve the answer (beneficial), but if the operator has no basic numerical skill, where is the benefit? Another example (from many years ago) a work colleague of mine, during his Phd studies, was assisting a student who had arrived at an answer for an object's speed. (n.b. I don't recall the exact details) My colleague asked the student to check the figure, and the student didn't change it, despite the strong hint. It was faster than the speed of light, and when this was pointed out, the student seemed mystified and responded with a blank expression, and stated that was the calculated speed. Logic bypass.