Somehow, I managed to survive 30 or so days of academic hell.
The hell is still with me, but I have a small breather in which I can now reflect on my inability to comprehend what is going on.
When I first heard the news that AI was a thing, I dismissed it. I saw the headlines, and I did not really pay attention to it. So also the institute where I teach and mark. We did not do anything about it, we did not teach ourselves what it was, how to use it, and so on. Until that first red flag we saw in our system, that was now geared to pick up the use of AI in student writings. At first, I saw it as a gimmick, I "accused" students of using AI (in a very academic and friendly in fact funny manner) and they all said one thing: "I did not use it". How could I really tell if they used AI or not? At that time, it was novel, no one really used it, and we kind of laughed it off.
Fast forward two and a half years. Academia (in my opinion) is literally crumbling. Okay, this is a bit of an exaggeration and I am also biased in terms of the field in which I teach. So, rather, the small section of academia in which I am a part of is crumbling, and no one is seemingly taking it seriously. In the two and a half years since the dawn of AI in student writing, my institution implemented a strict no internet policy in terms of research assignments. The students I am currently teaching, we decided, cannot be trusted with AI, and we as institute cannot accuse students of using AI (there is not "real proof"), so we just make them sit in a room without internet to write their "research essay". But the thing is, this is not research essays. This is a long exam question. Research requires one to search, to see what is written in academia, and to reflect on this in a slow process. Yes, not every student will do this, and the system worked. It fed the students that wanted to do research, like myself, and it spit out student that did not.
I really loved research essays, and I am here today, just having finished a PhD, because of the essays I was given as an undergraduate student. Now, no student is really allowed to do research because lecturers cannot assess papers not written by the student, and we have no way of telling whether a student wrote that paper or not. In the past we had similar issues, how could we tell if a paper was really written by a student, but this problem is on steroids now. Now, we are unable to tell if any student wrote the paper, because AI detectors are unreliable, and institutions cannot accuse someone of doing something if they do not have proof.
But what is the answer? I am not sure. I just awoke from marking more than 200 papers in which I am pretty sure every single one was written by AI. Even though the AI detectors cannot pick it up, I have been marking for a couple of years in the AI era. I have also taught myself how to work with most of the AI models, so I am pretty sure when I say that I know for certain that I did not mark one paper that was written by a human. There are so many clear indications of this (which I am not going to go into now) but I spent two to three weeks of my life marking AI slop...
The realisation is somewhat sobering.
I assessed 200 AI written papers and I am not sure how I feel about this situation.
Academia in my corner of the world, relying on research essays, peer reviewed articles, and so on, is based on written works. Students don't want to write and read, and now they have basically found free ways to read and write papers without lifting a finger.
In my social group, there are so many stories of younger generation students who "brag" and celebrate that they managed to pass a module without ever studying, using AI models for everything. Students are now going to graduate without ever lifting a finger. Or they are going to graduate without having the knowledge of how to write a paper, how to engage with literature, because some institutes literally closed the door on that opportunity.
And I am still sitting here, wondering whether this situation will make us think differently. Because everyone is too afraid to speak about this situation, so we are all actually in the dark on this one...
All of the photographs are my own, taken with my Nikon D300. All of the writing is my own, albeit inspired by a very tired brain and human that somehow just graded 200 computer AI slop.
There will be a great "Adjustment" when the crunch-time comes and people need to use their grey matter to perform these tasks, fail, and then, (particularly in other industries) things start to crumble into disarray.
We might be the last generation that sees true innovation. AI does not thoroughly critique as well as a human may.
For sure. And it is sad that universities, where one would think critical thinking is happening, will sort this issue out. But sadly from my experience, universities are no longer places for critical thinking (maybe I had the wrong impression). We call it, in my home language, a "wors masjien" or "sausage maker": universities take students in, press them into a mould, just to make money. No critical thinking is involved. In fact, questioning the status quo might get you into trouble. Alas.
Congratulations @fermentedphil! You have completed the following achievement on the Hive blockchain And have been rewarded with New badge(s)
Your next payout target is 35000 HP.
The unit is Hive Power equivalent because post and comment rewards can be split into HP and HBD
You can view your badges on your board and compare yourself to others in the Ranking
If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word
STOPCheck out our last posts:
Okay, I just saw this, and as you know my wife is also struggling with no evidence that students use AI. My worry is the future, as when AI is used for a paper, the user will have no understanding about a subject, and subsequently in the workplace it will have dire consequences. I have never used AI, and besides, I don't even know how to use it, but I am old school and only do things my own way.
Blessings and welcome back Dr. Phil :)
We are already seeing this. Crazy times. We should grab a coffee and talk about this issue, will message you.
Thank you so much! Looking forward to engage a bit more now, but I still have loads of marking left. About 200 more papers! But this is less pressing though.
Oh yeah, I will wait for your message. All strength to your marking of the papers.
!BEER
Thank you so much! Having just finished 240 or so papers, I need to mark about 150 more. Not the most fun thing to do in the world.
Still waiting for your message, but maybe it will come after you cruised through marking the 150 :)
Oh yes haha. It also took some of the energy that I managed to get back together after the first 250! Will message you today.
I have replied to the message and look forward to the meeting.
View or trade
BEER.Hey @fermentedphil, here is a little bit of
BEERfrom @papilloncharity for you. Enjoy it!Learn how to earn FREE BEER each day by staking your
BEER.So the way students are assessed needs to change!
Your wife might like this article
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2025/07/07/the-end-of-the-english-paper
I just had this discussion with my father this morning. (He is a professor, also teaching and marking, so we had some interesting discussions.) Thank you so much for the read rec. I will read it this afternoon.
They are in the process of changing it and thank you for the article.
!PIZZA
It's bizarre. As you say everyone knew it was coming and no one did anything. The whole way you assess needs to change. One on one conversations, portfolios, student led teaching, who knows - but the essay as it stands is dead. The only way forward is excellent teaching that is passionate and fosters curiosity. Everything else will follow.
Education needed a shake up..
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2025/07/07/the-end-of-the-english-paper
Thanks again for the link, will definitely read it this afternoon.
For sure, and the sad part is that people in high positions does not want this new way of teaching and assessment (as you noted, one on one conversations, portfolios, student led teaching and I would add student (peer review) assessment). I have suggested some of these ideas to my co-lecturers, but also the higher ups, but they cling to the old ways, "like it always was". And this will not work. Keeping the status quo like it is with AI will only lead to either disasters (essays written only by AI) or draconian assessment environments where the internet is off.
It's sad to hear so many students are relying on AI. The temptation is just too strong I suppose. I wonder how many of them spend more time revising what AI writes to mask detection than they would've actually writing their papers? Declines in critical thinking and cognitive declines are now well-documented for those relying too heavily on AI to do their thinking for them. I feel like a reckoning is coming as AI detection software gets more sophisticated. The AI detector might even be built into a browser or a plug-in that analyzes everything we read to flag AI-created content.
I am so frustrated by this. The one assessment I had to mark had a required reading of about 1-2 pages. It would have taken students 10 minutes to read the actual paper. But most if not all of them relied on revising AI generated papers and other students' papers (yes, even when AI is there, students still copy from other students). So, they spend MORE time revising AI slop and really bad answers, rather than just read the actual work. I am not even sure how this logic works.
This will be such a good help. But in terms of Universities, they still need to bite the bullet and just implement this. The institutions I work for all rely on Turnitin, and each and everyone of these institutes tell us "these software are not reliable". So, in my opinion, they just need to bite the bullet and tell us which ones to use, so that we can actually learn students also how to use AI in a productive and responsible manner.
It feels like we markers and lecturers are playing more the role of "police" than actual teaching and assessing.
That's hard to understand! Is it laziness or lack of confidence that they can do better themselves?
If used properly I think LLMs can be very helpful but I don't know that a majority of people will have the discipline not to rely on them too much or in ways they shouldn't.
That's a sad state of affairs in academia. I hope methods and tools evolve to find away around it or else I see a societal separation happening—those who can still think/act on their own and those who must rely on AI to perform daily tasks/responsibilities.
I just keep telling myself we're going through a chaotic, transformational few years and things will settle down soon. I hope that's the case anyway.
A combination, but I think the biggest issue is accountability and that there is no real harsh punishment if you get caught. It is really difficult to accuse students of anything without really solid evidence, and depending on institution you work for, they sometimes give more credit to student voices than stand behind the lecturer. (In South Africa, from my experience, universities are really just money making machines at this stage. But this is obviously a very much oversimplified view of things and it needs much more nuanced discussions.)
Especially in a place like South Africa where the majority of people (including myself) are not first or even second or third language English speakers. I have worked with so many students, and I include myself here as well, who have great ideas, but it is difficult to translate it into English. LLMs or any chatbot (ChatGPT Claude Gemini) can seriously help with structure and logic of thoughts if you already pen it down. So, in a country where few really speak English but where academia is almost 100% English, these LLMs can help in the best way possible: Writing your existing ideas in a scholarly way in a language that is not your own. But students and even lecturers are not even trying to tap this incredible resource, as they either misuse it (students) or they are incredible sceptical about it (lecturers).
Oh for sure. I think this is it. I am sure we will reach an equilibrium somewhere, where these tech will be normalised for the best case scenarios. Or maybe I am just too naive. But I think if people understand how to use it, they will see the potential. Maybe. Let us be hopeful.
P.S. So sorry for the long reply!
No need to apologize! Universities are the same way here in America—money making machines. Reaching an equilibrium is a good way to phrase it. I think this is what needs to happen. Our heads are spinning by the pace of innovation and change and this is only going to speed up in the short term.
For sure. It feels like there are new releases each and every day. Sometimes I really just turn everything off and go for a walk. It can just overwhelm you so quickly. But then you need to re-enter it again (almost like entering a simulation).
$PIZZA slices delivered:
@papilloncharity(2/15) tipped @riverflows
Come get MOONed!