\u201cThis is not a reward. It is a warning.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A professor\u2019s message of \u201cfrustration and sadness\u201d went viral after he caught many of his students using AI<\/a> on their papers. But this story didn\u2019t play out in the way you might expect. Instead of punishing everyone with zeroes or taking disciplinary action, he wound up giving them all full credit.<\/p>\n\n\n\n On one hand, it\u2019s an exasperated reaction that many educators can relate to in the ChatGPT era<\/a>, as grading written assignments has become more complicated. On the other hand, the response is part of a lesson about the importance of creative thinking and self-empowerment<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The story blew up from a student\u2019s post in the \/mildlyinfuriating subreddit<\/a>, where they claimed \u201cthree weeks of hard work on a paper\u201d was wasted thanks to their classmates\u2019 use of AI. (Ironically, their paper was an essay arguing \u201cagainst the use of AI.\u201d) But the professor\u2019s message is more nuanced than a simple \u201cI give up\u201d sentiment.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cI want to take a moment to speak candidly with all of you,\u201d he writes. \u201cOver the past week, as I have been reading your final papers, I have noticed a level of AI-generated writing that has left me deeply disappointed. Many of the submissions are so heavily AI-infused that they no longer reflect your voices, your thinking, or the skills this course is designed to build. It is disheartening for me as your instructor, and for what this means for your own learning.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n He argued that, when using AI to write papers, students are \u201charming\u201d themselves. \u201cWriting is not an arbitrary hoop to jump through; it is one of the few durable intellectual skills that will serve you across professions, relationships, and civic life,\u201d he writes. \u201cWhen you outsource that work, you weaken not just your ability to write, but also your ability to reason, to communicate, and to advocate for yourselves\u2026I am saying this not out of anger but out of frustration and sadness. I care about your development, I care about our state, and I am watching too many of you short-circuit your own growth and our collective future for the illusion of convenience.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n The professor says that, in an \u201cunusual decision,\u201d he will give everyone a 10\/10 on their final paper and cancel their final assignment, though he does also offer to give individual feedback to any student who emails him.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cAt this point, attempting to separate authentic work from AI-produced work has become counterproductive, and this course was never meant to be a surveillance exercise,\u201d he continues. \u201cI hate, absolutely hate, how AI has forced me to turn into a punitive detective, rather than, well, a teacher. I reject that completely. My goal is, and has always been, your learning.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n He says that his decision wasn\u2019t made lightly.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cI need you to hear this clearly: This is not a reward. It is a warning,\u201d he writes. \u201cIf you leave this course without having practiced your own writing, you will feel the consequences later, academically, professionally, and personally. AI cannot think for you. It cannot develop your voice. It cannot build skills you do not use. I sincerely hope you reflect on the choices you made in this course and how they align with what you want for yourselves. You deserve more than to let a machine do your thinking\u2026I cannot want your learning more than you do.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n In the Reddit comments, people largely reacted to the teacher\u2019s message. The responses are fascinating, with many supporting the instructor\u2019s words of wisdom and others saluting the student for avoiding the temptation of AI, even if their classmates didn\u2019t.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201c\u2019I cannot want your learning more than you do.\u2019 If that doesn\u2019t sink deep for people, there\u2019s no saving them.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cDang that is a very bold statement and cuts to the core of what a student is supposed to be.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cThe professor said you can send in your writing and he would offer feedback. I get your frustration\u2026 but why not turn it in anyway and say what you just explained here. You worked hard on this and deserve recognition. Great job at not taking the easy way out, btw\u2026 that\u2019s super refreshing!\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cThese kids: \u2018Gemini, summarize this email.\u2019\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cI feel bad for the instructor. The summation of their feelings of defeat and their struggle will hopefully compel a few people to try harder.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cI think the instructor\u2019s point is that by canceling the assignment, they\u2019re losing the opportunity to learn and develop their skills \u2013 that\u2019s the punishment. Even though the people who cheated won\u2019t realize it, now or possibly ever\u2026A genuinely sad state of affairs. I get where they\u2019re coming from, though, and I hope the students do at some point realize what they missed out on.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cGreat quote recently from Ted Chiang (sci-fi author) when asked about AI use in education: \u2018Your job is not to turn in completed assignments, it is to learn how to think.\u2019\u201d<\/a><\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cListen to what your teacher is trying to say. You did NOT do this assignment for nothing, because the point of the class is not to hand in a paper and get a grade. It\u2019s what you learned, what skills you mobilized. And you did that, while your fellow students who used AI didn\u2019t. You\u2019re right to be proud of your work, and what others did and what the teacher decided to do in reply doesn\u2019t take anything away from that. I<\/em>f you want feedback on your paper in order to improve, I would write to your teacher and explain this to him. <\/em>Great job not taking the stupid way out, and good luck for your other finals.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n One user did note that \u201ca large number of the AI-detection tools are pretty inaccurate,\u201d an argument supported by the University of San Diego Legal Research Center<\/u><\/a> and <\/em>Ars Technica<\/em><\/u><\/a>. \u201cAs tempting as it is to rely on AI tools to detect AI-generated writing,\u201d the latter wrote, \u201cevidence so far has shown that they are not reliable.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n This issue isn\u2019t going away, especially with AI growing even more sophisticated in mimicking human writing. The professor\u2019s \u201cwarning\u201d may be even more relevant in a few years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\u201cI am saying this not out of anger but out of frustration and sadness\u201d<\/h2>\n\n\n\n