‘But there is a difference between recognising AI use and proving its use. So I tried an experiment. … I received 122 paper submissions. Of those, the Trojan horse easily identified 33 AI-generated papers. I sent these stats to all the students and gave them the opportunity to admit to using AI before they were locked into failing the class. Another 14 outed themselves. In other words, nearly 39% of the submissions were at least partially written by AI.‘
Article archived: https://web.archive.org/web/20251125225915/https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/set-trap-to-catch-students-cheating-ai_uk_691f20d1e4b00ed8a94f4c01
I’m sorry to hear that.
Would you say that your experience was typical or was it especially bad for you (as in not designed for your needs) while other people were better off?
Not the best university at the time, in not the best country, so I’m not unique in that. Teaching practices were literally the opposite of what scientifically recommended. But on top of that, neuro diversity wasn’t as normal back then, so not only I wasn’t diagnosed, but I had to mask as hard as possible, which didn’t help at all.
Only very specific type of people thrived in that environment, everyone else coped, some more successfully that others.