{"id":48067,"date":"2025-07-30T17:44:11","date_gmt":"2025-07-30T17:44:11","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us\/48067\/"},"modified":"2025-07-30T17:44:11","modified_gmt":"2025-07-30T17:44:11","slug":"de-computing-is-not-the-answer-to-our-ai-problem-minding-the-campus","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us\/48067\/","title":{"rendered":"De-Computing Is Not the Answer to Our AI Problem \u2014 Minding The Campus"},"content":{"rendered":"

Students using artificial intelligence (AI) chatbots to cheat is a real concern. Consider the new Cluely<\/a> AI tool:<\/p>\n

With the help of Cluely AI, students can now\u00a0Cheat on Everything\u2014even live exams\u2014without ever lifting a finger. A tiny Bluetooth earpiece stays hidden, while the student\u2019s phone remains tucked away in a pocket or bag, quietly running Cluely AI in the background.<\/p>\n

When an examiner asks a question, Cluely AI picks up the audio through the phone\u2019s hidden mic, instantly converts it to text, and either processes it directly or sends it to an advanced AI like ChatGPT. Within seconds, a clear and accurate answer is generated.<\/p>\n

That answer is then read aloud through the Bluetooth earpiece, so the student hears it discreetly and can repeat it confidently\u2014sounding well-prepared even if they didn\u2019t study at all. There\u2019s no typing, no touching the device, and no obvious signs\u2014making it nearly impossible for anyone to detect.<\/p>\n

This is AI technology creep\u2014the dark side of learning. It offers a shortcut around the real work of education: not just memorizing facts, but understanding how they interlock to form disciplinary knowledge. We can expect more of this shadow-AI to seep into the academy. Faculty responses to this AI technology creep have varied. Some have turned to old-school methods like blue books<\/a> to guard against its influence. Others have, however, reluctantly begun exploring ways to incorporate AI into the curriculum. Consider Michigan Law School: after banning the use of AI in admissions essays in 2023, it reversed course and made AI usage mandatory<\/a> for the incoming class of 2025.<\/p>\n

\u2018TO BE ANSWERED USING GENERATIVE AI: How much do you use generative AI tools such as ChatGPT right now? What\u2019s your prediction for how much you will use them by the time you graduate from law school? Why?\u2019 the prompt asks.<\/p>\n

[RELATED: Universities Are Racing Toward AI. Is Anyone Watching the Road?]<\/a><\/p>\n

What we intend for education and learning is often missing in this discussion of whether to incorporate or not to incorporate AI. Jacob Riyeff, Marquette University\u2019s Director of Academic Integrity, suggests de-computing<\/a>. He says that would allow us to center on \u201c[a] human-scale education, not an industrial-scale education (let\u2019s recall over and over that computers are industrial technology).\u201d<\/p>\n

I sympathize with Riyeff\u2019s quest for a human-scale education. However, I view \u201chuman-scale\u201d as more malleable than Riyeff seems to allow. Human culture has, for thousands of years, adapted to new technology. The learned aspect of humanity is malleable\u2500even with AI chatbots. It is indeed a different technology, but technology nevertheless.<\/p>\n

To better understand Riyeff\u2019s concern, which is understandable, consider this example from one of his classroom AI assignments:<\/p>\n

Another student last term in the Critical AI class prompted Microsoft Copilot to give them quotations from an essay, which it mechanically and probabilistically did. They proceeded to base their three-page argument on these quotations, none of which said anything like what the author in question actually said (not even the same topic); their argument was based in irreality. We cannot scrutinize reality together if we cannot see reality. And many of our students (and colleagues) are, at least at times, not seeing reality right now. They\u2019re seeing probabilistic text as \u2018good enough\u2019 as, or conflated with, reality.<\/p>\n

Apparently, his student did not thoughtfully consider the chatbot\u2019s reply with reference to the quotes the student supplied. The disconnect with the actual author\u2019s intent could have been one of those AI hallucinations; it could also have been carelessness on the student\u2019s part, whether in the prompt itself or failing to check the chatbot\u2019s reply. Perhaps the real issue is the proper use of chatbots. The apparent transactional use\u2014once and done\u2014would likely have been more effective with a transformational use\u2014keeping the human in the loop\u2014with the student having the chatbot as an interlocutor and not simply to convey what might be thought of as an article copied from an encyclopedia.<\/p>\n

I don\u2019t have enough information from Riyeff\u2019s account to fully assess his complaint. However, it\u2019s reasonable to note that many who use AI for research or essay writing often settle for \u201cgood enough\u201d AI-generated responses rather than rigorously verifying or refining them.<\/p>\n

[RELATED: Worried About AI? Study the Humanities]<\/a><\/p>\n

However, Riyeff fails to appreciate how this technology can articulate a human\u2013AI symbiosis.<\/p>\n

Symbiosis? Consider two ways of conceptualizing human use of AI technology. Riyeff portrays this technology as probabilistic and mechanical. Probabilistic? Yes. Mechanical? Yes and no. The generation of replies via computation and algorithms aligns with a general understanding of \u201cmechanical.\u201d However, that view understates the complexity of AI\u2014its emergent properties, the coherence of its text generation\u2014often on par with or even superior to that of educated humans\u2014the way it tailors responses to the human prompter, and the structure of its probabilistic outputs. \u201cMechanical\u201d also fails to capture the seeming humanity of the interaction\u2014and yes, faculty themselves sometimes struggle to convey such humanity to their students.<\/p>\n

Perhaps that symbiosis is a delusion. If so, we should ask: so what? AI reflects back to us the human data on which it has been trained, trading on the anthropomorphization, personification, and humanization that define much of human experience. We see this reflected in the human worship of deities, charismatic entertainers, politicians, and inspiring teachers. If this is the AI problem that bothers Riyeff, then it deserves a far deeper discussion than simply dismissing it as \u201cirreality.\u201d It raises the question of who we are in relation to the Other as AI. Is AI simply a thing, an object, a tool? Or is it something more\u2014especially considering how humans generally perceive \u201creality\u201d?<\/p>\n

Riyeff truncates the contours of learning, even with AI technology. I suggest that Riyeff reconsider what human-scale means, and will mean in the future, with AI technology. Perhaps AI is repugnant in many ways, but unfortunately, so is a good portion of humanity.<\/p>\n

As I re-read Riyeff\u2019s opening paragraph, quoting Pope John Paul II, I see a different outcome that Riyeff\u2019s experience with AI allows:<\/p>\n

I work at Marquette University. As a Roman Catholic, Jesuit university, we\u2019re called to be an academic community that, as Pope John Paul II wrote, \u2018scrutinize[s] reality with the methods proper to each academic discipline.\u2019 That\u2019s a tall order, and I remain in the academy, for all its problems, because I find that job description to be the best one on offer, particularly as we have the honor of practicing this scrutinizing along with ever-renewing groups of students.<\/p>\n

Perhaps with his next group of students, he will scrutinize AI reality once more, but in terms of a human-AI symbiosis.<\/p>\n

Image: \u201cAre you sure you want to shut down your computer now?\u201d by Antonio Cavedoni on Flickr<\/a><\/p>\n

\"Joe <\/p>\n

\n Joe Nalven is a former Lecturer of Anthropology and Lawyering Skills at the University of San Diego. <\/p>\n


\n View all posts
\n <\/a><\/p>\n

<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"Students using artificial intelligence (AI) chatbots to cheat is a real concern. Consider the new Cluely AI tool:…\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":48068,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[46],"tags":[182,181,191,74],"class_list":{"0":"post-48067","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-computing","8":"tag-ai","9":"tag-artificial-intelligence","10":"tag-computing","11":"tag-technology"},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/48067","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=48067"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/48067\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/48068"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=48067"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=48067"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=48067"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}