[La-cgs] Update on AI Usage case

Thu May 2 16:03:09 CDT 2024

Thank you Sanjay.

I continue to be astounded by the lack of attention displayed by some who use AI for writing. See the first sentence of the Introduction to a scientific paper (p. 2 of the attachment)! This is in the neighborhood of some of my research interests (lithium ion batteries) but it took a Reddit scandal for me to become aware of the paper. Even if a graduate student generated that paragraph, the corresponding author, Yangai Liu, should have at least read the first sentence of his own paper. This also shows how ridiculously superficial some peer-reviews might be -- this paper actually got published!!!

Best regards,
Ramu

--------- B. Ramu Ramachandran Associate Vice President for Research & Dean of Graduate School T. L. James Eminent Scholar Chair Professor P. O. Box 7923 Louisiana Tech University Ruston, LA 71272, USA 318-257-4304
On 5/2/2024 3:15:30 PM, Menon, Sanjay <sanjay.menon at lsus.edu> wrote:
Thanks, Jason!  It is nice that you have a policy in place that provides a basis for individual faculty syllabus policies.

Ramu:  Here’s what I tried out this semester (in addition to the standard plagiarism policy which is to refer this to the conduct board or the Community Standards Board as it is now called):

POLICY ON AI TOOLS:

Students who use generative AI or other machine learning tools to create submitted work do so at their own risk.  While students are free to use AI tools for initial information gathering, generating ideas, or checking grammar, any submitted work will be subject to the above plagiarism policy.  AI tools with similar prompts often produce similar results, and any similarity with another student’s submitted work could result in a Code of Conduct inquiry. Just as you would cite sources, if you do use AI to create any portion of your submitted work, you would need to acknowledge the same in both the text and in the list of sources. 

When you submit something for a grade, you are responsible for it.  You are in effect stating that it is your own work. So, if you submit AI created content as your own work, you should expect the plagiarism policy to apply, with AI tool usage considered as unauthorized assistance from others.  

Penalties for AI use in submitted work (postings and assignments) flagged by tools such as Turnitin are as follows:

a.  Allowable usage - 15%.  No penalties
b.  Usage from 16% to 25%- Any section that has been flagged could get zero credit.
c.  Usage from 25% to 49% - Any section that has been flagged could get zero credit plus an additional 10-point penalty.
d.  Usage of 50% and above – Possibly no credit for entire assignment.  This could be investigated by the Student Accountability office, leading to additional penalties and consequences.

Thanks!

Sanjay

From: Bodily, Jason <jason.bodily at lsuhs.edu>
Sent: Thursday, May 2, 2024 2:55 PM
To: B. Ramu Ramachandran <ramu at coes.latech.edu>; Menon, Sanjay <Sanjay.Menon at lsus.edu>; Louisiana Council of Graduate Schools <la-cgs at lists.latech.edu>
Subject: Re: [La-cgs] Update on AI Usage case

Here is a syllabus using one of several examples of syllabus language.  Here is a useful site that collects some examples of language to use in syllabi:
https://ctl.utexas.edu/chatgpt-and-generative-ai-tools-sample-syllabus-policy-statements#:~:text=Regarding%20the%20potential%20use%20of%20generative%20AI%20tools%2C,credited%20to%20that%20system%20falls%20under%20that%20policy [https://ctl.utexas.edu/chatgpt-and-generative-ai-tools-sample-syllabus-policy-statements#:~:text=Regarding%20the%20potential%20use%20of%20generative%20AI%20tools%2C,credited%20to%20that%20system%20falls%20under%20that%20policy]

From: B. Ramu Ramachandran <ramu at coes.latech.edu [mailto:ramu at coes.latech.edu]>
Sent: Thursday, May 2, 2024 2:48 PM
To: Sanjay Menon <sanjay.menon at lsus.edu [mailto:sanjay.menon at lsus.edu]>; Bodily, Jason <jason.bodily at lsuhs.edu [mailto:jason.bodily at lsuhs.edu]>; B. Ramu Ramachandran <ramu at coes.latech.edu [mailto:ramu at coes.latech.edu]>; Louisiana Council of Graduate Schools <la-cgs at lists.latech.edu [mailto:la-cgs at lists.latech.edu]>
Subject: Re: [La-cgs] Update on AI Usage case

CAUTION: THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED OUTSIDE OF LSUHS. For protection: verify sender first, and NEVER input usernames or passwords. Use the "PHISH ALERT" button to report questionable emails or contact IT Helpdesk (SHVHelp at lsuhs.edu [mailto:SHVHelp at lsuhs.edu]).

If anyone is willing to share, please send me examples of course policies regarding AI use incorporated into syllabi.

-Ramu

On 5/2/2024 2:14:16 PM, Menon, Sanjay <sanjay.menon at lsus.edu [mailto:sanjay.menon at lsus.edu]> wrote:
I raised the topic at our Dean’s Council earlier today.  Looks like the topic is already on senior administration’s radar from the undergrad side and they are planning to invite experts to come and talk to faculty about course (and assessment) redesign incorporating AI.

Sanjay

From: Bodily, Jason <jason.bodily at lsuhs.edu [mailto:jason.bodily at lsuhs.edu]>
Sent: Wednesday, May 1, 2024 12:35 PM
To: B. Ramu Ramachandran <ramu at coes.latech.edu [mailto:ramu at coes.latech.edu]>; Menon, Sanjay <Sanjay.Menon at lsus.edu [mailto:Sanjay.Menon at lsus.edu]>; Louisiana Council of Graduate Schools <la-cgs at lists.latech.edu [mailto:la-cgs at lists.latech.edu]>
Subject: Re: [La-cgs] Update on AI Usage case

Beautiful. Thanks

From: La-cgs <la-cgs-bounces at lists.latech.edu [mailto:la-cgs-bounces at lists.latech.edu]> on behalf of B. Ramu Ramachandran <ramu at coes.latech.edu [mailto:ramu at coes.latech.edu]>
Sent: Wednesday, May 1, 2024 11:52 AM
To: Sanjay Menon <sanjay.menon at lsus.edu [mailto:sanjay.menon at lsus.edu]>; Louisiana Council of Graduate Schools <la-cgs at lists.latech.edu [mailto:la-cgs at lists.latech.edu]>
Subject: Re: [La-cgs] Update on AI Usage case

CAUTION: THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED OUTSIDE OF LSUHS. For protection: verify sender first, and NEVER input usernames or passwords. Use the "PHISH ALERT" button to report questionable emails or contact IT Helpdesk (SHVHelp at lsuhs.edu [mailto:SHVHelp at lsuhs.edu]).

Sanjay:

Thank you for this info. I agree that "all of the above stems from considering AI usage as an impediment to learning." We need to look at generative AI based on large language models as the "calculator for writing." My view on AI usage may be stilted because of my discipline -- most scientists suck at writing and so any tool that helps one express their ideas clearly (spell-check, grammar check, AI) is always welcome. The trick is to know enough about the subject to recognize where AI goes off the rails -- like a pilot who knows when to take over from the autopilot.

Speaking of going off the rails, I am attaching an example that a colleague shared. The blue highlights denote AI-generated text (More than 80% of this report was AI-generated). Note the first sentence of the "Theory" section where Ohm's Law is applied to a vibrating string. Wow! This student did not learn enough physics to recognize that Ohm's law relates voltage, current, and resistance in a conductor, and has nothing to do with tension, mass, and wave propagation in a string!

Another problem -- the symbols for density and speed did not copy over from the AI window to MS Word. The student was clearly too unengaged to notice that! Notice Eq. 1-1 where there are no symbols -- not even the tenstion T!!!

I believe Jason had asked for examples of where AI goes wrong -- here is one! In the hands of a careless user, even the best AI is only of limited value 😂

Best regards,
Ramu

On 5/1/2024 10:46:15 AM, Menon, Sanjay <sanjay.menon at lsus.edu [mailto:sanjay.menon at lsus.edu]> wrote:
Hi all,

Some of you might recall, that during the AI discussion I had mentioned submitted student work with Turnitin AI scores of over 50%.  I spoke to our Dean of Students who confirmed that Conduct Board complaints based on AI usage is on the rise. Here are some other points she mentioned that may be of interest to this group:

* It appears that a high Turnitin AI usage score by itself may not be sufficient to prove AI usage.  Unlike traditional Turntin reports that provide sources that can be verified, the same is not possible for AI outputs that are generative. 
* The board is now asking faculty/students to provide writing samples for comparison.  This may not be of much help in 100% online classes where the writing sample could also be AI generated.
* There is an increase in “confessions”.  More students are admitting AI usage when confronted with the AI usage score.  This raises an equity issue as those who deny usage are more likely to get away with it if AI use was prohibited by the professor in the syllabus.
* Professors’ policies on AI usage widely varies across campus with varying degrees of AI usage allowed.  Students can claim confusion when taking multiple classes with varying AI policies.

As I mentioned during our session, all of the above stems from considering AI usage as an impediment to learning.  If we were to adopt the approach of “AI as an aid to learning” or “AI usage as a required skill”, then we would need to rethink and reorient our teaching and evaluation methods, including for our thesis/dissertation students. You might recall our discussion on the value of doing a literature review using AI, or having AI generate code in a programming class.

As this issue is unlikely to be resolved anytime soon, I suggest we have it as an agenda item for future meeting.    

Sanjay

Sanjay T. Menon, Ph. D.
Dean of Graduate Studies
Professor of Management
Director of India Studies
Louisiana State University Shreveport
Office: (318) 797-5247     Fax:     (318) 798-4120
www.linkedin.com/in/sanjaytmenon [http://www.linkedin.com/in/sanjaytmenon]

One University Place
Shreveport, Louisiana 71115
[LSUS_Secondary_RGB Purple-Gold_email]

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.latech.edu/pipermail/la-cgs/attachments/20240502/ae5dde7d/attachment-0001.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 1090 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.latech.edu/pipermail/la-cgs/attachments/20240502/ae5dde7d/attachment-0001.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 2024-03-25-Academic-Help-Reddit-Blog-ChatGPT-in-Scholarly-Pub.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 447170 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.latech.edu/pipermail/la-cgs/attachments/20240502/ae5dde7d/attachment-0001.pdf>