WHAT WE HAVE DONE THIS YEAR 23/24 II: AI in the exam part 1 or reluctance to go back and forth

Last year, we introduced AI into the subject’s activities. In fact, as I told you in a video last year, the implementation strategy had been good, and I thought it was the right way to go.

This year I felt I should continue along the same path, so I tried to continue with this idea. In all the assignments of the course, AI was introduced in one way or another as an “advisor”, to brainstorm initial ideas or to develop resources with a more or less careful prompt refinement process.

However, in an attempt to be coherent, the exam had to be aware of AI and appropriate it in a more complex process. That is why I introduced Resources and ICT in the exam.

How did I introduce it? Well, I did it in two moments:

This was the first part of the exam, which is worth half of the exam I was telling you:

Your mission is to develop a teaching project for an imaginary group of primary school students. The project should incorporate technology to enhance learning. Your task is to design an assignment where students will actively engage with at least three different technologies, with at least two of them being chosen from the following options: Comic/Images, Augmented Reality, Stop-Motion, Robots/Programming. The aim is for students to actively create using these technologies rather than passively consume content. You have the flexibility to create one comprehensive activity or three –or more– connected activities, depending on your preference.

1. Then, first, please describe the Initial Details:

• Age of Students: Specify the age group of your imaginary students.
• Curriculum Goals: Define the educational objectives aligned with the Spanish (or your original country’s) core curriculum that students will achieve through this project.
• Student Profile: Describe the characteristics and abilities of your imaginary students.

2. AI Inquiry: With these initial details, consult your preferred AI tool what to do (please record this interaction in a video and show it in your video exam). And then, before continuing with part 3, justify -in general- if you will do changes of the AI proposal or not.
3. Project Execution: And now, for every part of the project:

• Clearly outline the steps students will follow to complete the assignment.
• Show in the video how to do the task and how the final artefact (product) looks.
• Explain the added value of incorporating digital tools into the project.
• Detail how you will assess the task and provide a rubric for grading the assignment.
• Assess the chosen apps/tools (all of them) based on their privacy, data protection, and rights policies following the Rubric for eLearning Tool Evaluation? Address the concerns identified.
• Utilize the ACAD Framework to articulate the learning design of your project, either by parts or in its entirety. You can use the physical toolkit or the virtual one.

As an “exam,” my students sent me this exercise in video format and also sent me the transcript, including references, detailed laws, and so on.

And what happened?

Well, I have the feeling that AI has harmed the performance of a sector of my students that is precisely the one most in need of other types of help… Let me see if I can explain myself clearly:

There are some brilliant, VERY good, VERY well-done exams for which the AI helped them to improve their perspective a lot… They are those students who are very bright and hard-working and who go all out in their exams… the AI has been an interesting resource that has enriched their work, although I confess that less than I expected.

But that’s not the majority of the student body. What happened to the others?

Well, what I should have foreseen would happen: First of all, the students “translated” the assignment, not in language, they simplifyied it (yes, that’s the theory I always keep in mind, in theory)… but instead of doing it themselves, most of them asked ChatGPT (or their favourite AI, there are several) to “translate” my exam for them (What do I have to do if my teacher asks me for…”, and what did the AI do? The predictable thing is that it turned the exam wording into its simplest and most superficial formulation, skipping all the details and nuances that make a final exam a final test of competencies…

And what did the students do? They took that simplification and, without changing almost anything, put it back into the AI and asked it to give them the answer…

The result? Yes, a disaster… very nice videos, but with “clay legs” underneath… no contextualisation, no objectives or competences to develop, generic students, generic apps in generic classes, kids who do nothing and apps that only decorate the classroom… almost always standardised… but with little foundation.

In short! little humanity… a lot to think about…

I also asked them to reflect a bit on the role of AI in their exam… but that’s another story, and this post is already too long, so in two weeks, I’ll tell you about it…