“AI Made Cheating Too EASY” - Universities Bring Back Real Learning

**SPEAKER_1** (0:00)
This article that came out talking about University of Chicago Law School bans devices to reduce AI reliance, and then it kind of coincides with the other story that shows a wake-up call about AI cheating. Brown University professor says, let me read both of them, and then, Tom, I'll come to you mainly, and then we'll go from there. So the first story I want to get to is University of Chicago decides they will ban first-year law students from using iPhones, tablets and laptops in class beginning this fall, seeking to ensure students learn to think critically, strategically and independently, without relying on artificial intelligence. With AI disrupting higher education, our commitment to rigorous legal education also must mean openness to even rapid adaptation. Administrators say a willingness to rethink our practices is consistent with our law school's long history of innovation. After a year of consultation with students, faculty and law firm leaders, legal technology executives and the broader university community, administrators concluded that students must develop independent reasoning while preparing to use AI in legal practice. So that's out. Now look at this one. Brown is going to do the same thing. Brown University professor Roberto Serrano saw scores collapse between a take-home midterm and an in-person final, which I'm glad they did that, leading him to suspect widespread AI-assisted cheating. Some students fell from perfect midterm scores to below 20% on the final. Serrano teaches welfare economics and social choice theory. The midterm was administrated at home after a school shooter killed two students in December. Whoa. The problem with this technology is that the cost of cheating has basically gone down to zero.
It's very easy for students to succumb to the temptation. After Serrano announced that the final would be held in person, many previously high score students dropped the course. Did you hear, Devaney? These guys scored a high number take home. All of a sudden, they're like, no, no, we're doing it in school. It's like, oh shit, drop the course. Why? Because they haven't been studying at all. Others who earned grades in high 90s on the midterm scored in the 50s.
You scored 90s in a take home midterm, you're scoring 50s in school. Are you surprised, Serrano, share the details of the Brown Standing Committee on the Academic Code on July 8th. University spokesperson, Brian E. Clark, said the committee would proceed according to the procedure and that Brown treats every academic integrity allegation with the utmost seriousness. Tom, your thoughts on this.

**Tom** (2:26)
Well, first of all, I love both these stories for two very key reasons. Number one, University of Chicago Law School, and people may not think of it like this, but law schools and MBA schools, business schools, they want to protect their reputation. And what they don't want is a bunch of people coming out, zombies that don't know how to perform. I mean, Pat, how long would it take if you were doing a staff meeting and you're talking about strategy? We got some challenges. Hey, it's February. We have some challenges. We need to make a plan on this and everything. People are sitting in your conference room. How many of them are sitting on laptop or an email? They're not. We're talking about the numbers in front of us and try and make a decision. If these people were just AI zombies coming at NBA school, how long would it take you to figure that out, Pat? Not long. Fifteen minutes and be like, you graduated with a Harvard MBA and you can't come in here to this room and just speak intelligently, form sentences, and have your thoughts across and do the dish. You have to go back to your desk and let AI do for it. So University of Chicago, they're concerned about number one, the reputation of the school, and number two, the ability of the school to attract students. I love what they're doing. They're saying, time out, put all those devices away. Let's talk about legal theory. Let's hear you reason. Let's hear you debate a fellow student the way you would in a courtroom. The second is, I love what happened at Brown. And there are people that have stepped out on this and have jumped on it to discuss it. I love the fact that there is a student that got a 95.5 on the midterm and a 95 in person in class on the final. And you know what he said? The teacher stepped back and said, the professor stepped back and said, You know what?
I regarded that individual through observation throughout the semester as an excellent student and attentive in class. And I felt that he would probably do well. I was not guess what? So he's observing him in class. And then he gives him the in person final. The guy goes, OK, let me take care of this. Boom, 95 and 95, which means he didn't cheat on the midterm. It's very, very even. Then there was another student. He said, I like equally well, but the guy was somewhat less initiated and he had a 55 in the midterm and a 55 in the final. Guess what? Consistency. Maybe he's working two jobs, maybe what it was, maybe he's struggling with the class, but the two scores proved he was there. I love these two stories because it's a shining a light on it, that AI may be able to do assimilated research for you. AI may be able to take some time. We use it for prepping for podcasts here.