[wdutch]

I imagine maths teachers had a similar dilemma when pocket calculators became widely available.

Now, in the UK students sit 2 different exams: one where calculators are forbidden and one where calculators are permitted (and encouraged). The problems for the calculator exam are chosen so that the candidate must do a lot of problem solving that isn't just computation. Furthermore, putting a problem into a calculator and then double checking the answer is a skill in itself that is taught.

I think the same sort of solution will be needed across the board now - where students learn to think for themselves without the technology but also learn to correctly use the technology to solve the right kinds of challenges and have the skills to check the answers.

People on HN often talk about ai detection or putting invisible text in the instructions to detect copy and pasting. I think this is a fundamentally wrong approach. We need to work with, not against the technology - the genie is out of the bottle now.

As an example of a non-chatgpt way to evaluate students, teachers can choose topics chatgpt fails at. I do a lot of writing on niche topics and there are plenty of topics out there where chatgpt has no clue and spits out pure fabrications. Teachers can play around to find a topic where chatgpt performs poorly.

[freedomben]

Thank you, you make an excellent point! I very much agree, and I think the idea of two exams is very interesting. The analogy to calculators feels very good, and is very much worth a try!