This month, we look into the future and address the question of how AI will impact examinations at universities and schools. This topic suggestion comes from our working student Vincent, who is currently completing an exchange semester in Sweden.
Reports of AI-generated work by pupils and students are becoming more frequent. Increasingly, the question is being discussed in the media how educational institutions are supposed to identify which texts were actually created by humans. Despite some indications, such as specific phrasings, writing styles, and above-average flawlessness, it is already difficult to determine beyond doubt whether a particular text truly originates from a human. With increasingly improving language models and prompting methods (e.g., “Formulate as humanly as possible and include errors”), unambiguous detection will become progressively more difficult. This is a major problem, considering that a large part of academic education relies on the creation of texts. Be it for applications, examinations, master’s theses, or term papers – examiners everywhere rely on text-based methods. However, there is a high risk that these examination methods will no longer function reliably in the long term. Detector software, which promises to identify artificially generated texts, can provide clues, but is not reliable enough itself and can often be circumvented with simple means. And particularly alarming: Texts written by non-native speakers are often falsely identified as AI-generated by these programs. The risk of discrimination in selection processes can thereby increase significantly. Especially since it is not only difficult to prove that a text was created by AI, but also that the opposite is true.
But how can universities and other educational institutions address this? Oral examination procedures could in most cases clearly show whether someone has truly thought for themselves and understood. However, oral examinations are associated with enormous time and personnel expenditure and cannot easily assess the same scope of knowledge as written examinations.
The majority of educational institutions currently still rely on a straightforward prohibition. However, some institutions are already exploring new approaches. Till Krause from the University of Landshut, for example, allows students to actively use AI as a source – as long as this is clearly indicated. Thus, a precise indication of the language model used and the prompt applied is required. Because despite all the challenges that the use of AI brings to educational institutions, AI offers one thing above all: an incredibly vast wealth of information that can be excellently used for learning and provides a fantastic basis for the development of one’s own ideas and thoughts.
At the University of Economics in Prague, too, a pragmatic approach is taken to the use of AI. The local Business Administration program will no longer require a traditional bachelor’s thesis starting in autumn 2024. Instead, there will be project work, the results of which will be evaluated. Many consider this approach more sensible and practical than the previous assignments. This is a thoroughly sensible approach, especially for study programs where the primary focus is not on flawless and artful writing. Perhaps this even presents an opportunity to highlight the talents of individuals who, for example, have a spelling disability.
The fact is, academic examination procedures will have to be changed. AI – similar to other technological means – has already entered the daily lives of pupils and students. Now, methods are needed to assess human knowledge in other ways.
An absolutely worthwhile podcast on this topic is available here: https://www.ardaudiothek.de/episode/11km-der-tagesschau-podcast/ki-or-not-ki-koennen-wir-ihre-texte-noch-enttarnen/tagesschau/13779441/
