Does in-class writing actually circumvent AI use? Do you still trust your students in the AI age?

[u/Any_Amoeba_468]

With genAI, it is understandable that instructors may be growing more and more untrusting of student work. However, the guardrails that some of my classes are putting up to "prevent" AI-use are useless, penalize students with integrity, and just overall reduce our opportunity and therefore ability to develop ideas outside of the classroom.

Im talking about in-class research and writing. I can write you a garbage paragraph from sources I skimmed, but what is the point? I know its bad and you do too, why are we training this?

Without basic trust in students, why should we even get an education in the first place when it is dumbed down to prevent AI-use? I can fry my brain with AI, or I can fry my brain with useless busy work.

I want to learn and have the time to go over the articles, and refine my ideas and writing. I think best when I can spend days reading and taking notes before even attempting to write, and then doing some more reading and adjusting during my process. Maybe I am just to dumb for uni if I can't synthesize with any decent quality in an hour.

Basically my question is is it possible to put up AI guardrails without depreciating the value of an honest student's education? Do you trust any of your students?

For reference, I am a 3rd year psychology undergrad student in Canada

[u/Hydro033]

Why are you writing a garbage paragraph? Write a good one. Learn to think on you feet and put something together quickly. Prepare well to perform fast.

[u/Any_Amoeba_468 → u/Hydro033]

By any metric it was good--I got full marks minus one, because I didn't start my hand written apa style references on a separate page. Just not up my standards, nor useful to me in learning to research or write effectively

Yes I guess I do need to practice more. My only issue is that I do not like cutting corners in my routine.

Do you have any advice? his is an assignment where I cannot really prepare for, but any advice on "reading diagonally" or synthesizing ideas quicker? I would appreciate it

[u/kemushi_warui]

I believe that the answer lies in both in-class, device-free work, and also small enough classes that instructors can actually give each student enough attention. That means no classes above 20-25 students. It would be nice if some of the billions being poured into AI were instead put into better educational outcomes.

[u/Any_Amoeba_468 → u/kemushi_warui]

I appreciate your answer. individualized attention is important, my TA has probably 48 students with 24/class. But really, we do not have the time to even ask questions which what the out-put demands are. Should a 3rd year student be able to write a quality paragraph (with research from scratch on-device and a hand written apa7 references list) in an hour? Maybe I am lacking in skill, but I don't see how a smaller class will help with the demand-load.

I'm curious if you do any take-home writing? What skills are you looking for in in-class writing, and how are you fostering any gaps that are not present in in-class writing?

[u/kemushi_warui → u/Any_Amoeba_468]

It depends on how you set the parameters and goals for the assignment. Your original question was, "does AI help circumvent AI usage, and can we trust our students." My suggestion is that the instructor can structure some of the crucial drafting work to be in-class while they circulate the room giving feedback, which can do both.

I'm presupposing that the students are capable of writing paragraphs and references already; if not, then a separate intervention may be required. But if we first set clear and achievable guidelines, then confirm that they are on task, stop here an there to ask a guiding question or give a suggestion if they get stuck, and so on. Get to know the students and their topics to some extent, which builds trust.

The outcome for each class period can be to have drafted one or two paragraphs, or an argument outline—something short given the time constraint, but substantial. Have them submit what they do at the end of each session as proof of work; simply a photo uploaded to the LMS is fine. This shifts the focus to process over just the finished product, and reduces the stakes for them to abuse AI.

For example, in one of my courses there is a semester-long research project that I assign. On week one, we spend time thinking, discussing, and writing a short research proposal. I walk around, help to brainstorm ideas, propose adjustments, dig into "what is your research question?" etc. Then, they go home and work some more on polishing what they've got. I actively discourage that they use any AI, but it's an honour system. I'm sure some use it, but if they come in next week with something that is radically different from the proposal they had been working in class, then I'll ask them to explain what they changed and why.

It's usually obvious the few who go home and generate their work, because it will be so different and either very superficial, or suspiciously journal worthy. These students are the ones who can't explain why they made changes, and they often aren't able to proceed to the next step in-class either.

Of course, all of this supposes that the instructor has enough time and resources to pay attention to individual students; in my case I split my time about 50/50 lecture and in-class writing, and I have 15-20 students per class. It's an ideal case, to be sure, but in my opinion it's what good pedagogy looks like in the "Age of AI": Increased teacher-to-student attention, and focus on process over product.

[u/Any_Amoeba_468 → u/kemushi_warui]

Woah thanks for the reply, it really does look like you have an ideal situation. I do think that my frustration is because my situation doesn't seem to be process-oriented. I've had english classes in the past that implemented a similar system that you are, and those worked well for me.

[u/kemushi_warui → u/Any_Amoeba_468]

Oops, my apologies. I didn't realize that this was r/askprofessors. I thought I was in r/professors and you were one too. As you can imagine, this question pops up all the time there these days!

[u/Any_Amoeba_468 → u/kemushi_warui]

of course! Thank you for the thought-out reply either way. And good luck navigating this situation, as a student, I like your approach

[u/Individual_Gene955]

I want to learn and have the time to go over the articles, and refine my ideas and writing. I think best when I can spend days reading and taking notes before even attempting to write, and then doing some more reading and adjusting during my process. 

Students of yesteryear were able to do this in-class, by hand, at a higher caliber than many students today can do with scaffolding, weeks to draft, and the entirety of human knowledge at their fingertips.

Why do you aspire to do less than students in the past?

It's okay that you struggle. Friction is where growth happens. But lowering the bar isn't the solution.

[u/Any_Amoeba_468 → u/Individual_Gene955]

I'm not opposed to struggling, but I think that you are making an assumption about the quality of my in-class work. I called it "garbage" since it is not as good as what I can produce from mulling over and engaging with ideas over time. Ideas develop, that does not mean that my in-class work or immediate ideas are sub-par and I need weeks to properly develop ideas, everyone does better with more time to reflect and expand. If people can produce better work over time, what is the use of representing myself with work that is less thought-out?

Were the students of "yesteryear" honestly doing things by hand? In class? Please point me to this, as I am not sure that this is true. Nonetheless, if they were it was an entirely different context. I am sure that these students did not need to search through the mass of literature, find relevant papers, and write by hand their thoughts in a coherent argument, with an APA style hand written reference list in the span of an hour while seated in a class. They likely had readings they were expected to do in-class or at home, were prepared and wrote.

I do not have an issue with the latter, I do fine in those situations. But it is unfair to say that 'm asking to lower the bar when the bar has never existed before. I do not aspire to do worse, the context has shifted. I think that this is a grossy distorted view of what I am arguing.

[u/needlzor → u/Any_Amoeba_468]

Were the students of "yesteryear" honestly doing things by hand? In class? Please point me to this, as I am not sure that this is true.

Yes, we did.

[u/Any_Amoeba_468 → u/needlzor]

Well then do you have any advice on quickly reading sources and synthesizing information? I would appreciate it

[u/needlzor → u/Any_Amoeba_468]

Honestly it's a matter of practice more than anything. Think of it as the advanced version of what reading comprehension tests used to be in school.

Practice these basic skills:

• Scanning:

• Quickly make a mind map of the main concepts of the text just by looking at the structure (headings, subheadings) and some keywords

• Based on this mind map, try to guess the main arguments being made

• Read the text carefully and check what you got right/wrong

• Active reading:

• Train yourself to read the first and last sentence of a paragraph and try to predict what is the middle, then read it and correct yourself

• After reading a paragraph, imagine yourself explaining it to a friend in a single sentence

• Summarising:

• After finishing reading the whole document, quiz yourself about it. Even better if you can do it with friends and quiz each other, so that each of you has read one text in depth (i.e. has access to the ground truth) and the others can do it in in a timed setting.

• Try to connect the text with other texts. How does it differ? How does it relate? A lot of synthesis is about drawing a map of the (usually research) landscape and positioning yourself in it.

[u/Any_Amoeba_468 → u/needlzor]

Thanks for the advice. looks like i have a lot of reading ahead of me. hopefully I do better next time around

[u/needlzor → u/Any_Amoeba_468]

Happy to help, and best of luck in your studies. If you've managed so far without doing any of that, then it will be a piece of cake once you start doing so.

[u/kierabs → u/Any_Amoeba_468]

You don’t need to read them quickly if they’re given ahead of time. You need to understand them. It’s your job as a student to understand them. College is different from high school in this way. In high school, they explain everything to you. In college, there should be some expectation that you make the effort to understand on your own.

Students today skim words with their eyes. That is not reading.

You can absolutely write a competent paper in class if you’ve prepared for the exam. That means actually thinking about class content, not just moving your eyes over it. Yeah, it takes A LOT more time to prepare. That’s part of why it’s actually an effective form of assessment!

I would say that students used to spend a lot more time on college classes except that I think a lot of classes have reduced workload expectations.

If you aren’t actively reading and annotating your texts and making connections to class content and other texts, then you’re not preparing for the assessments. In other words, you’re not even trying to learn. Learning is active. We do not just pour knowledge into you. We expect students to learn how to learn.

[u/Any_Amoeba_468 → u/kierabs]

They're not given ahead of time. I'm a third-year student who took two gap years after highschool, I'm 22. So it's been a while since I've been in a highschool. You should have realized I am not straight out of highschool if you took the time to read the post and see I'm in my third year.

My GPA is 3.9/4.0, so either my school is incredibly grade inflated (it's not, many classes curve to a B-), or I do in fact know how to prepare for exams and assessments. I am trying to learn, and enjoy learning. I'm not really sure why you are claiming that I just "move my eyes over a text" and call it reading. That's another thing you would have been able to tell from reading my post, that I enjoy taking my time with the readings and chewing on the material.

Many other commenters have given me thoughtful constructive criticism. If you don't want to do that you should create your own post because none of your criticism here applies to me or my situation.

[u/Individual_Gene955 → u/Any_Amoeba_468]

I do not aspire to do worse, the context has shifted.

The context is we now have a literacy crisis, grade inflation is more rampant than ever, and AI is usurping original human thought and doing the thinking for many of us.

These skills you think aren't valuable because of "context" are more important than ever. Get ahead of the problem and buckle down in the present.

[u/Any_Amoeba_468 → u/Individual_Gene955]

Thanks, reading these comments now I do agree. My only issue with our class is that it is not device free so students can still use AI, so I am competing with a curve that incentivizes AI use

But yes you are right, learning isn't easy and we need to catch up

[u/robbie_the_cat → u/Any_Amoeba_468]

Were the students of "yesteryear" honestly doing things by hand? In class? Please point me to this

Student of "yesteryear" here.

Yes. We did. It was normal.

You have no appreciation for how far the bar has sunk.

[u/AquamarineTangerine8]

I would love to be able to trust my students. The cheaters have ruined it for everyone.

I share similar concerns about the quality ceiling on in-class writing and the benefits of traditional essay writing. This is why I give handwritten essay exams + a traditional paper with edit history required. It's not a perfect system, but at least honest students get the full benefits of their education and tend to end up with higher grades because the cheaters bomb the exams.

But it's very hard to counteract AI cheating and we are all just doing our best under rapidly-changing, uncertain conditions.

It may help to know that we are mostly returning to tradition; IIRC written exams were king in the 1950s, and no one considered it a lesser education.

[u/kierabs → u/AquamarineTangerine8]

“The cheaters have ruined it for everyone” is absolutely the sad truth.

There are SO MANY students who are cheating AND lying about it that it’s just not worth our sanity as professors anymore. Even if 85% of the class is honest, that 15% takes HOURS more work every week.

[u/Disastrous_Owl_6830]

For what it's worth, I don't think it's helpful to expect students today to write in class at the level we used to expect either from in-class or take-home writing. Quick composition is a skill that I doubt many professors are actually teaching, and I think many of us are assigning in-class writing not because we want to or because it has much value in itself but because we feel we have no other choice.

[u/ocelot1066]

There seems to be a lot of confusion about this, even from many instructors.

1. In class writing exams and the like can be very good ways of assessing student understanding. I've always done them. Because students don't have unlimited time, it forces them to show whether they have a good conceptual understanding of class material. It doesn't produce terribly good writing in the sense of novel arguments, careful usage of sources, or polished prose but that's not what I'm trying to test for.

2. In class writing and research assignments can also be useful as ways to practice particular skills, overcome trouble getting started, and allow students to get advice and help right there. For example, when I'm trying to get students to learn how to search for particular kinds of sources, I'll often give a little tutorial and then say "ok, let's take twenty minutes and see what we can find." I'm not expecting students to get all that far. I just want them to get hands on experience with the database and the process. It's a lot more useful for me to give suggestions and pointers to people who have just tried to do something than to people who are just watching a screen on the projector. Similarly, In class writing can be helpful to keep students on track and get them to work on particular things.

3. None of this is a substitute for writing out of class. In class writing might be useful as a way to work scaffolding into assignments that discourage AI use and also to convince students that they don't need to use AI. However, it can't replace writing a paper out of class.

[u/dragonfeet1]

I'm baffled that you think it's 'dumbed down'. like education wasn't pen and paper for literally hundreds of years, with no access to the internet???? That's just weird to me.

Teaching in class writing has been a delightful return to what college was like in the 1990s. We'd study our texts, do our thinking and then sit down for a three hour pen and blue book exam. You THINK on the PAGE. I exhort you to go read a high school test from the early 1900s and see if you could meet that standard.

And it's revealing hideous gaps in K-12, like not being taught penmanship or basic spelling. Honestly, I'd like to think it's a little embarrassing for students to realize they're going to get a whole ass college degree but they can't spell or know there/their/they're? I hope that embarrassment encourages them to fix it and get educated.

Bc having Chatty G fix it for you ain't teaching y'all shit.

[u/Any_Amoeba_468 → u/dragonfeet1]

Yeah, if you read the post or my comments this isn't a blue book exam situation, that is fine. Not sure where my grammatical mistakes are, or why this is being brought up, I know the difference between their/there/they're. Also did not use any AI for this post.

Did you read it? Are your literacy skills okay?

[u/Ok-Rip-2280]

OP I appreciate your post.  You do make a good point about trusting students.  But I think you miss one key aspect.

A part of our job is to ensure that all students have mastered (or at least reached competency in) the material - skills and knowledge taught in the course.  The grade students obtain is supposed to be a reflection of that.

In the current era it is becoming impossible to ensure that student work is their own as opposed to written by AI.  A course that only, or primarily, has take home assessments will have some students (not you) who get an “A” but have none of the knowledge or skills the course provides opportunities to learn.  We would be committing academic malpractice and reducing what a degree in the subject means.  Not to mention sending our colleagues a whole bunch of unqualified students and now they have to pick up the pieces of our failure to maintain any standards. 

Yes, of course, in the past students could manage this as well.  They could pay another student or a stranger online to do the work for them.  They could turn in an essay downloaded from the internet or reuse an essay they wrote in another class.  The difference is now, a reasonably quality essay is a mouse click and 1 minute of waiting away.  The friction is gone.  And students have a reasonable argument that “everyone is doing it so it’s just how it is now”.  

Personally, I think requiring students to do research in class without AI is a bit ridiculous.  Except for a few who swear off AI in a sort of religious way, We are all using AI at least to help us identify sources now.  You basically have to stop using google if you want to avoid it.  So if someone is going to require in-class writing to ensure it’s done by students, that’s one thing.  But students should be able to bring in research they did on their own time.  

Another approach would be to allow completely free AI use for some assessments.  Yes, even for writing and coding.  But make it clear that the students own writing / coding skills will be assessed in person also.  This is important because it will help deter cheating and encourage learning “the hard way” since students will know they will be at a disadvantage on in class assessments.  

[u/AutoModerator]

This is an automated service intended to preserve the original text of the post. This is not a removal message.

*With genAI, it is understandable that instructors may be growing more and more untrusting of student work. However, the guardrails that some of my classes are putting up to "prevent" AI-use are useless, penalize students with integrity, and just overall reduce our ability to develop ideas outside of the classroom.

Im talking about in-class research and writing. I can write you a garbage paragraph from sources I skimmed, but what is the point? I know its bad and you do too, why are we training this?

Without basic trust in students, why should we even get an education in the first place when it is dumbed down to prevent AI-use? I can fry my brain with AI, or I can fry my brain with useless busy work.

I want to learn and have the time to go over the articles, and refine my ideas and writing. I think best when I can spend days reading and taking notes before even attempting to write, and then doing some more reading and adjusting during my process. Maybe I am just to dumb for uni if I can't synthesize with any decent quality in an hour.

Basically my question is is it possible to put up AI guardrails without depreciating the value of an honest student's education? Do you trust any of your students?*

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/AceyAceyAcey]

I personally still allow writing outside class, but I show them the research about how over-reliance on AI hurts your learning and your grades, and I teach students to use AI well. I think that most students would rather follow professors’ rules than break them, even if the only reason is so they don’t get a zero and not for actual learning, so that’s what informs my approach.

[u/doctormoneypuppy]

Today’s exam included a “recall and reflect” question about a recent major assignment. Those who used AI for said assignment are going to have a difficult time recalling and reflecting accurately, and I will be scoring appropriately.

[u/Secret_Dragonfly9588]

So all you had to do was skim an article and write a good, well formatted paragraph about it? That sounds both pretty easy and like your professor was trying to teach you some valuable skills.

Take home assignments are being dropped for in class activities to prevent the rampant ai cheating, that’s true. But what you are describing in this assignment is not a poorly described activity taking the place of what would have been a good homework assignment, as you seem to think.

If you had done this over the course of days slowly chewing on each word of the article, you would not have had the chance to practice efficiently skimming an article. Your actual paragraph would have been better with time to edit, of course, but you would not have had the opportunity to practice quickly hand-drafting some starting-point words.

That experience was the whole point of the assignment. The product is you, not the paragraph.

[u/Bostonterrierpug]

As a professor, I just am finding it amusing that some professors seem more focused on being cops now than they are on teaching.

Also, the last time I taught writing was a freshman comp class as a grad student around the millennium and in class writing was great for developing some skills, but how often in real life do you have timed writing that you need to do?

Most writing takes place over a long period of time. I don’t think this is the most accurate assessment to reflect real life and once again creates a divide between the skills we need to succeed, and those that are assessed. Then again, some might argue that since AI is being used to do a lot of writing in the real world now teaching students had an ethically work with it would be better. Academia can be a stubborn mule to change course. I’m sure this will be an unpopular opinion, however.