评论
打印
In February, Ella Stapleton, then a senior at Northeastern University, was reviewing lecture notes from her organizational behavior class when she noticed something odd.
今年2月，美国东北大学的大四学生艾拉·斯特普尔顿在复习组织行为学课程的讲义时，发现了一些奇怪之处。
Halfway through the document, which her business professor had made for a lesson on models of leadership, was what looked like a recognizable prompt: “expand on all areas. Be more detailed and specific.”
这份文档是她的商学教授为领导力模式课程准备的讲义，读到一半时，出现了一句很像提示词的话：“对所有方面进行扩展。更加详细且具体。”
It was followed by a list of positive and negative leadership traits, each with a prosaic definition and a bullet-pointed example.
这句话后面列出了一系列正面和负面的领导特质，每个特质都有一条枯燥乏味的定义和带有黑圆点的例子。
Ms. Stapleton texted a friend in the class.
斯特普尔顿给班上的一个朋友发了短信。
“Did you see the notes he put on Canvas?” she wrote, referring to the university’s software platform for hosting course materials. “He made it with ChatGPT.”
“你看到他放在‘画布’上的讲义了吗？”她写道，“画布”指的是该大学用于存放课程资料的软件平台，“他的讲义是用ChatGPT做的。”
“OMG Stop,” the classmate responded. “What the hell?”
“天哪，真的吗？”同学回应道，“什么鬼情况？”
Ms. Stapleton decided to do some digging.
斯特普尔顿决定深入调查一番。
She reviewed her professor’s slide presentations and discovered other telltale signs of AI: distorted text, photos of office workers with extraneous body parts and egregious misspellings.
她检查了教授的PPT，发现了其他暴露AI的痕迹：歪曲事实的文本、办公室职员的照片上有多余的身体部位，以及严重的拼写错误。
She was not happy.
她很不高兴。
Given the school’s cost and reputation, she expected a top-tier education.
考虑到学校的学费和声誉，她期待得到一流的教育。
This course was required for her business minor; its syllabus forbade “academically dishonest activities,” including the unauthorized use of artificial intelligence or chatbots.
这门课程是她商科辅修专业的必修课，教学大纲禁止“学术不端行为”，包括未经授权使用人工智能或聊天机器人。
“He’s telling us not to use it, and then he’s using it himself,” she said.
“他告诉我们不要用AI，结果自己却用上了。”她说。
When ChatGPT was released at the end of 2022, it caused a panic at all levels of education because it made cheating incredibly easy.
2022年底ChatGPT发布，在教育界各层级引发了全面恐慌，因为它让作弊变得异常简单。
Students who were asked to write a history paper or literary analysis could have the tool do it in mere seconds.
学生能让这个工具在几秒钟内写完一篇历史论文或文学分析。
Some schools banned it while others deployed AI detection services, despite concerns about their accuracy.
一些学校禁止AI，另一些学校则部署了AI检测服务，尽管对其检测准确性存在担忧。
But, oh, how the tables have turned.
但是风水轮流转。
Now students are complaining on sites like Rate My Professors about their instructors’ overreliance on AI and scrutinizing course materials for words ChatGPT tends to overuse, like “crucial” and “delve.”
现在学生们正在“教授点评网”之类的网站上抱怨他们的老师过度依赖AI，并仔细检查课程材料中是否有ChatGPT喜欢滥用的词汇，比如“关键”和“深入探讨”。
In addition to calling out hypocrisy, they make a financial argument: They are paying, often quite a lot, to be taught by humans, not an algorithm that they, too, could consult for free.
除了揭露老师的虚伪之外，他们还提出了经济层面的论点：他们支付高昂的学费是为了接受人类教师的教育，而非使用一套自己也能免费咨询的算法程序。
For their part, professors said they used AI chatbots as a tool to provide a better education.
教授们则表示，他们把AI聊天机器人用作工具，从而提供更优质的教育。
Instructors interviewed by The New York Times said chatbots saved time, helped them with overwhelming workloads and served as automated teaching assistants.
接受本报采访的教师们表示，聊天机器人节省时间，有助于减轻繁重的工作量，并可以充当自动化教学助手。
Generative AI is clearly here to stay, but universities are struggling to keep up with the changing norms.
生成式AI显然会持续存在，但大学却难以做到与时俱进。
Now professors are the ones on the learning curve and, like Ms. Stapleton’s teacher, muddling their way through the technology’s pitfalls and their students’ disdain.
现在教授们成了需要学习的人，而且像斯特普尔顿的教授一样，在AI技术的隐藏陷阱与学生们的轻蔑中艰难地摸索前行。
