You never have a calculator inside your skull. The fewer times an idea has to leave and enter your skull, the further ahead to a solution you can intuitively see from the available data. Using a calculator is a great skill to have, except where it prevents the development of trivial skills the brain is capable of easily doing without a calculator.
But otherwise I take the point. AI isn’t the only matter that they are left on their honour to conduct themselves. There’s lots of ways they could cheat. The more trustworthy contestants are, the more everyone can benefit from available efficiencies. I guess that the advent of AI has changed the assumptions behind the tradeoffs that have been chosen.
This contest takes place simultaneously in high schools across multiple countries. The individual proctors should be responsible for monitoring, but clearly they failed.
When I did it (nearly 20 years ago) we couldn’t use online resources at all. No Google, no Stack Overflow. Our proctor was there to ensure we didn’t cheat.
This isn’t about how good you’ll perform at a job, it’s about your knowledge, ability to design, and critical thinking skills.
Are spelling bees dumb because you can just look up the words in a dictionary?
Maybe the idea of a distributed international competition just doesn’t work anymore. It’s either too hard to proctor, or teachers are willing to help or let their students cheat in order to have an advantage.
What is the “bad design” in this case?
Designing a contest where participants have access to AI, when they aren’t supposed to use it and then looking shocked when the inevitable happens.
Either allow a commonly accepted industry tool, or restrict participants for the duration of the testing.
I remember my grade 6 teacher telling me I won’t always have a calculator handy. **gestures broadly out the window.
You never have a calculator inside your skull. The fewer times an idea has to leave and enter your skull, the further ahead to a solution you can intuitively see from the available data. Using a calculator is a great skill to have, except where it prevents the development of trivial skills the brain is capable of easily doing without a calculator.
But otherwise I take the point. AI isn’t the only matter that they are left on their honour to conduct themselves. There’s lots of ways they could cheat. The more trustworthy contestants are, the more everyone can benefit from available efficiencies. I guess that the advent of AI has changed the assumptions behind the tradeoffs that have been chosen.
How do you propose restricting participants?
This contest takes place simultaneously in high schools across multiple countries. The individual proctors should be responsible for monitoring, but clearly they failed.
When I did it (nearly 20 years ago) we couldn’t use online resources at all. No Google, no Stack Overflow. Our proctor was there to ensure we didn’t cheat.
This isn’t about how good you’ll perform at a job, it’s about your knowledge, ability to design, and critical thinking skills.
Are spelling bees dumb because you can just look up the words in a dictionary?
Only if you fail to stop dictionairies from getting into the rooms.
Maybe the idea of a distributed international competition just doesn’t work anymore. It’s either too hard to proctor, or teachers are willing to help or let their students cheat in order to have an advantage.