Cognitive damage, not productivity gains, may be the most important consequence
paulkrugman.substack.com
On college campuses around America, old-fashioned blue books are making a comeback.
Around a century ago these standardized booklets for written exams were introduced by Butler University in Indianapolis. For many former students of a certain age — myself included — the sight of a blue book can generate anxiety and even nightmares. And many former instructors — myself again included — recall the tedium and strained eyesight of trying to decipher students’ handwriting. So it was an improvement when exam-taking shifted from paper to computer. Or so it seemed at the time.
Now, however, students are using AI to write essays and answer questions on take-home exams, as well as taking in-person exams on their computers. As a result, an AI-arms-race has developed between instructors and students. Concerned that students are not doing the work themselves but are simply copying and pasting AI output, instructors have begun using AI programs to detect students’ use of AI. Inevitably, there are now AI programs that students can use to outwit the instructors’ AI detection programs.
So, not surprisingly, many instructors are going back to handwritten in-class exams, generating a sudden boom in the demand for blue books. Ominously, even the return of in-person testing may not solve the problem of testing in the face of AI:
Cheating using AI glasses is on the rise in Asia and will doubtless spread worldwide.
