I'm taking CS in college right now, and when we do our projects we're required to have a editor plugin that records every change made. That way when they grade it, they see how the code evolved over time, and not just the final product. Copying and posting has very distinct editor patterns, where organically developed code tends to morph over time.
In-person analog checkpoints seem to be the most effective method. Think internet-disabled PCs managed by the school, written exams, oral exams, and so forth.
Making students fix LLM-generated code until they're at their wits' end is a fun idea. Though it likely carries too high of an opportunity cost education-wise.
If I was a prof, I would make it clear to the students that they won't learn to program if they use AI to do it for them. For the students who wanted to learn, great! For those who just wanted to slide through with AI, I wouldn't care about them.
I'm taking CS in college right now, and when we do our projects we're required to have a editor plugin that records every change made. That way when they grade it, they see how the code evolved over time, and not just the final product. Copying and posting has very distinct editor patterns, where organically developed code tends to morph over time.
which editor plugin are you using?
In-person analog checkpoints seem to be the most effective method. Think internet-disabled PCs managed by the school, written exams, oral exams, and so forth.
Making students fix LLM-generated code until they're at their wits' end is a fun idea. Though it likely carries too high of an opportunity cost education-wise.
If I was a prof, I would make it clear to the students that they won't learn to program if they use AI to do it for them. For the students who wanted to learn, great! For those who just wanted to slide through with AI, I wouldn't care about them.