It’s been a lovely summery day in Maynooth so far, despite the summer having definitely ended and therefore having to return to teaching at the start of my penultimate academic year as a university teacher. The campus was very full this morning, and I was stopped many times on my walk into the office by new students trying to find their lecture theatres. A common (understandable) mistake for the uninitiated of Maynooth is to think that the Science Lecture Theatre is actually in the Science Building. To add to the excitement there was a fire alarm in Pugin Hall, where I sometimes go for lunch, so the building was evacuated. The kitchen staff and others were taking the opportunity to bask in the sunshine before the alarm ended. I think it was a false alarm. In any case lunch was available as soon as they opened up again, and no harm was done.
It’s hard to believe that it is two full years since I returned from sabbatical, but at least I’m teaching the same modules this semester as I did when I returned in the Autumn of 2024. I still have to get everything sorted out, though, including setting up my Moodle pages and preparing the materials, which is what I’ve been doing today, as well as giving my first lecture of the year, for MP469 Differential Equations and Complex Analysis, this afternoon at 2pm; my second, also MP469, will be at 11am on Tuesday (tomorrow).
The timetable for my Engineering Mathematics (EE206 Differential Equations and Transform Methods) module has not changed, so my first lectures on that (a double session) are not until tomorrow. That means I have three hours of teaching tomorrow and every Tuesday throughout the semester, which will make Tuesday my most tiring day.
Both the modules I am teaching this term are mathematical in nature. As last year, I am concerned about the integrity of the coursework element of these modules in the light of improvements in Generative AI. Only a couple of years ago GenAI could not solve the sort of problems I set for homework, but now it generally can – especially for EE206. I don’t altogether object to people applying artificial intelligence to solve mathematical problems, but the issue is that it does make mistakes. Moreover, instead of saying “sorry I can’t solve that problem” it will generally present a superficially plausible but incorrect solution. Although students will probably use GenAI for problem-solving, I think it is important that they learn to do such problems themselves, otherwise they won’t know whether the solution coughed up by the algorithm is correct or not. That way lies disaster.
The only way to learn mathematics is by doing it. If students get GenAI to do the mathematics for them, then they won’t learn it. In the past we have given marks for coursework (usually 20% of the module mark) mainly to encourage students to do them. Students who don’t bother to do these exercises generally do badly in the final exam (80%).
For these reasons I moved the assessment from weekly homework sheets – which could be tackled with AI – to supervised in-class tests for which students can use notes on paper, but not laptops or phones, just like they would in the final examination. I will of course give examples for the students to have a go at themselves, and I will give feedback on their attempts, but they will not contribute to the module score. Another advantage of this approach is that students won’t have to do so much work against deadlines outside of class. Some students will probably use AI to solve these non-contributory assignments, which is fine by me. It’s like having an extra tutorial. To learn they must actually try the problems, rather than absorb the methods by just watching CoPilot solve them.
I followed this approach last year and it worked quite well so I’m keeping the same basic idea, although with some tweaks. As I described here, this means I have taken a much harder line on assignments than other lecturers and indeed other departments. I allow no assignment to contribute to a module grade unless it is supervised in such a way as to prevent “AI” being used. I believe that this is the only way to maintain the integrity of these assessments and that to do anything else will result in a lowering of academic standards. I believe there should be university-wide regulations to manage it, but there are none…
