Academia

759 readers
1 users here now

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
26
 
 

As for his teaching job, matters have only gotten worse. He said that he’s lost trust in his students. Generative AI has “pretty much ruined the integrity of online classes,” which are increasingly common as schools such as ASU attempt to scale up access. No matter how small the assignments, many students will complete them using ChatGPT. “Students would submit ChatGPT responses even to prompts like ‘Introduce yourself to the class in 500 words or fewer,’” he said.

...

But giving up doesn’t seem to be an option either. If college professors seem obsessed with student fraud, that’s because it’s widespread. This was true even before ChatGPT arrived: Historically, studies estimate that more than half of all high-school and college students have cheated in some way.

...

Even last year, one survey found, more than half of K-12 teachers were using ChatGPT for course and lesson planning. Another one, conducted just six months ago, found that more than 70 percent of the higher-ed instructors who regularly use generative AI were employing it to give grades or feedback to student work.

....

In the most farcical version of this arrangement, students would be incentivized to generate assignments with AI, to which teachers would then respond with AI-generated comments.

Archived Linked

27
28
 
 

University President Minouche Shafik resigned from her post on Wednesday, she wrote in an email to the Columbia community. The announcement comes only weeks before the beginning of the 2024-25 academic year and marks the end of a tumultuous year in the position.

During her time as president, Shafik faced fierce national scrutiny for her administration’s handling of pro-Palestinian student protests, academic freedom, and on-campus antisemitism. She is the third Ivy League president to resign from the position in relation to campus tensions over the war in Gaza following University of Pennsylvania’s Liz Magill and Harvard University’s Claudine Gay.

29
30
31
32
33
34
35
 
 

Changes by the tests' maker in recent years have shifted scores upward. That has led to hundreds of thousands of additional students getting what's considered a passing score -- 3 or above on the 1-to-5 scale -- on exams in popular courses including AP U.S. History and AP U.S. Government.

The nonprofit behind the tests, College Board, says it updated the scoring by replacing its panel of experts with a large-scale data analysis to better reflect the skills students learn in the courses. Some skeptical teachers, test-prep companies and college administrators see the recent changes as another form of grade inflation, and a way to boost the organization's business by making AP courses seem more attractive.

"It is hard to argue with the premise of AP, that students who are talented and academically accomplished can get a head start on college," said Jon Boeckenstedt, the vice provost of enrollment at Oregon State University. "But I think it's a business move." The number of students cheering their higher AP scores could rise again next year. The College Board said it is still recalibrating several other subjects, including its most popular course, AP English Language, which attracts more than half a million test takers.

36
37
38
 
 

A recent study has exposed a method of artificially inflating citation counts through "sneaked references," which are extra citations included in metadata but not in the actual text of articles. This manipulation, uncovered in journals by Technoscience Academy, distorts citation metrics that are critical for research funding and academic promotions. The Conversation reports:

The investigation began when Guillaume Cabanac, a professor at the University of Toulouse, wrote a post on PubPeer, a website dedicated to post-publication peer review, in which scientists discuss and analyze publications. In the post, he detailed how he had noticed an inconsistency: a Hindawi journal article that he suspected was fraudulent because it contained awkward phrases had far more citations than downloads, which is very unusual. The post caught the attention of several sleuths who are now the authors of the JASIST article. We used a scientific search engine to look for articles citing the initial article. Google Scholar found none, but Crossref and Dimensions did find references. The difference? Google Scholar is likely to mostly rely on the article's main text to extract the references appearing in the bibliography section, whereas Crossref and Dimensions use metadata provided by publishers.

To understand the extent of the manipulation, we examined three scientific journals that were published by the Technoscience Academy, the publisher responsible for the articles that contained questionable citations. [...] In the journals published by Technoscience Academy, at least 9% of recorded references were "sneaked references." These additional references were only in the metadata, distorting citation counts and giving certain authors an unfair advantage. Some legitimate references were also lost, meaning they were not present in the metadata. In addition, when analyzing the sneaked references, we found that they highly benefited some researchers. For example, a single researcher who was associated with Technoscience Academy benefited from more than 3,000 additional illegitimate citations. Some journals from the same publisher benefited from a couple hundred additional sneaked citations.

We wanted our results to be externally validated, so we posted our study as a preprint, informed both Crossref and Dimensions of our findings and gave them a link to the preprinted investigation. Dimensions acknowledged the illegitimate citations and confirmed that their database reflects Crossref's data. Crossref also confirmed the extra references in Retraction Watch and highlighted that this was the first time that it had been notified of such a problem in its database. The publisher, based on Crossref's investigation, has taken action to fix the problem.

To combat this practice of "sneaked references," the authors suggest several measures: rigorous verification of metadata by publishers and agencies like Crossref, independent audits to ensure data reliability, and increased transparency in managing references and citations.

39
40
41
42
 
 

Without paywall: https://archive.ph/RAvdG

43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
view more: ‹ prev next ›