Parents Take School To Court After Student Punished For Using AI
- Reference: 0175267349
- News link: https://news.slashdot.org/story/24/10/16/2045235/parents-take-school-to-court-after-student-punished-for-using-ai
- Source link:
> "The Plaintiff Student will suffer irreparable harm that far outweighs any harm that may befall the Defendants," their filing [2]reads [PDF]. "He is applying to elite colleges and universities given his high level of academic and personal achievement. Early decision and early action applications in a highly competitive admissions process are imminent and start in earnest on October 1, 2024. Absent the grant of an injunction by this Court, the Student will suffer irreparable harm that is imminent."
>
> The school, however, is fighting back with a [3]motion to dismiss [PDF] the case. The school argues that RNH, along with his classmates, was given a copy of the student handbook in the Fall of last year, which specifically called out the use of AI by students. The class was also shown a presentation about the school's policy. Students should "not use AI tools during in-class examinations, processed writing assignments, homework or classwork unless explicitly permitted and instructed," the policy states. "RNH unequivocally used another author's language and thoughts, be it a digital and artificial author, without express permission to do so," the school argues. "Furthermore, he did not cite to his use of AI in his notes, scripts or in the project he submitted. Importantly, RNH's peers were not allowed to cut corners by using AI to craft their projects; thus, RNH acted 'unfairly in order to gain an advantage.'"
[1] https://www.theregister.com/2024/10/16/parents_sue_student_ai/
[2] https://regmedia.co.uk/2024/10/15/ai_cheat.pdf
[3] https://regmedia.co.uk/2024/10/15/dismiss.pdf
Ah so these are the parents (Score:3)
People often say that parents are no longer the allies of the school when it comes to discipline or punishment or breaking the rules and that the parents always think their children are special or exempt from these things. I always think that might be a generalization but here is one data point anyway.
Re: (Score:2)
We're way behind other parts of the world. In some places, parents [1]actively help students cheat [cbsnews.com]. It's more low keyed in other countries, but parents are definitely not on the teachers side.
[1] https://www.cbsnews.com/news/indian-parents-scale-school-wall-to-help-students-cheat-on-exams/
Re: (Score:2)
A lot of parents are awful to teachers. They call and complain about nonsense. But it really goes both ways, because
A lot of teachers are also really awful.
My only options will be Devry or the University of (Score:2)
My only options will be Devry or the University of Phoenix! which one Mrs. Hill?!?!
Better to learn early (Score:2)
Clearly guilty. He's lucky he will learn life's lessons at an early age and hopefully move on.
Re: (Score:1)
How do you know that the statements the school has made are true? Have you reviewed the evidence or any documented confessions from the student?
Or are you just assuming you have all the relevant knowledge before making a decision?
Re:Better to learn early (Score:4, Informative)
In the linked documents, he doesn't deny using AI to help write the paper.
Doesn't Sound Like Top Tier Talent (Score:5, Insightful)
I have a tragic message for the parents. Your child isn't as smart as you say he is.
I use AI for all kinds of writing tasks. After just a few prompts it's easy to see the formulaic patterns that ChatGPT throws into the text. ("In Summary [...]", bullet lists, etc)
It sounds like this kid's real crime was using AI without proof-reading it. Because it doesn't take many tweaks to the output to make your content sound self-written.
Re: (Score:2)
We need a law. All AI output must be produced in [1]Yoda-ish [urbandictionary.com].
[1] https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Yodaish
Right to plagiarize (Score:4, Interesting)
> ... may befall the Defendants ...
This is 'nothing bad happened' thinking. While common and innocuous itself, it leads to 'it didn't happen to me' thinking: That is far from harmless. The name Stockton Rush should be fresh in people's minds.
> .... irreparable harm that is imminent.
Yes, every college will remember this student demanding the right to plagiarize, when explicitly told not to.
> ... was for research purposes ...
While courts have sided with shallow arguments of morality, a "he did not cite" behaviour demonstrates selfishness.
Re: (Score:2)
> Yes, every college will remember this student demanding the right to plagiarize, when explicitly told not to.
That's what I thought too, but they anonymize his name in the lawsuit.
Children of the Snowflake (Score:4, Insightful)
The children of the Snowflake feel entitled to break the rules because they can't think for themselves or accept the consequences of their behavior.
Reminds me of a conversation from TRON:
Alan Bradley: Some programs will be thinking soon.
Dr. Walter Gibbs: Won't that be grand? Computers and the programs will start thinking and the people will stop.
Re: (Score:2)
> The children of the Snowflake feel entitled to break the rules because they can't think for themselves or accept the consequences of their behavior.
Yup, just like [1]this one [totalprosports.com]. We know who he's voting for.
[1] https://www.totalprosports.com/nfl/baltimore-ravens-fan-who-brutally-assaulted-two-washington-commanders-fans-for-no-reason-whatsoever-gets-perfect-karma-for-his-actions/
I'm having a hard time seeing the parents' side (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm having a hard time seeing the parents' side.
If a student is doing simple math homework and uses a calculator, that's cheating.
So why should it change if a student is doing an essay and asks an AI to write it?
In both cases, the educational goal isn't to find a tool to do the work, but for the student to understand the concepts being taught.
Now the parents' argument that this may negatively impact their child's future also seems pretty flawed to me. The same could be said for a student that buys a paper off the internet from a cheating website, is caught, and receives a failing grade. But few people would say that the cheating student was unfairly punished.
Re: (Score:2)
The real harm to the child is from having helicopter parents who resort to legal action when their child is punished for breaking the rules. That's some might fine parenting there, Lou.
Think a detention will put off colleges? (Score:3)
Wait till they find out he has parents who like suing educational institutions!
Book 'em, Dano! (Score:2)
Hey Mom, hey Dad, maybe the "lesson" you're teaching your son is that if he doesn't respect the rules, you'll always be there to bail him out, even if it means spending $$$ on lawyer fees. That would do him a lot more damage than not being accepted into some indoctrination camp.
Insane parents (Score:2)
What I find insane is that parents get involved at all in this sort of thing, let alone go to court over it.
My kids are adults now, but I never got involved if the school disciplined them unless the school contacted me. Part of getting an education is learning to deal with difficult people, and if mommy and daddy are going to launch a lawsuit every time somebody hurts the kiddy's feelings, they'll never grow up.
Education isn't a Contest (Score:2)
> RNH's peers were not allowed to cut corners by using AI to craft their projects; thus, RNH acted 'unfairly in order to gain an advantage.'"
That pretty much says it all. Education as a contest between students. If you wonder why our schools are generally failing large number of students that explains it. You can't have winners without creating some losers.
Has anyone told... (Score:3)
.. the school that just doing a google-search these days means you have used an AI-powered tool.
Let the fun begin.
AI search vs. cheat (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes, and had the student really just been using it for research by, for example, using Google to find information I doubt the school would have had any problem. However, if you read the article (yes I know Slashdot rules apply) you'll see that the problem is that the student used AI to write parts of the project and they then submitted it as their own work without citing the source which is plain and simple academic cheating or plagiarism. Claiming it was for "research" when you are using it to write parts of your submitted work is highly dubious...unless your research was to find out what happens if you cheat using AI in which case I guess the student has now been enlightened.
Re: (Score:2)
He wasn't punished for plagiarism. He was punished for using an AI when he was told not to.
Re: AI search vs. cheat (Score:3)
Hair splitting at its finest.
The student did not write what was submitted and turned it in as if it was, despite being given warning it was unacceptable conduct in both student handbook and in a presentation to students at the start of the year.
Given that, it is cheating, plagiarism, or both.
Re: (Score:2)
No actually, again if you read the article (sorry, I know!), you will find that the parents are suing for "the removal of any indication that cheating was involved". So again it seems that the school regard this as cheating rather than plagiarism but either can could apply: either you are presenting the AI output as your own (plagiarism) or using a forbidden tool to gain unfair advantage (cheating). Regardless the school is disciplining the student for an academic offence i.e.not just for using AI but for u
Re: (Score:1)
More specifically, he is getting punished for getting caught.
If he had used AI to generate an essay and asked it for references, then read it, absorbed the knowledge and rewritten it in his own words while also validating and correctly referencing the references, he would have been fine.
Re:AI search vs. cheat (Score:4, Informative)
> That sequence of words was not there before he generated it with software. Therefore the words are his own work even if he did not create the sequence directly.
He did not generate it, the AI algorithm did. Whether or not it is plagiarism vs. cheating depends on whether you regard that the student is copying the output of the algorithm (plagiarism) vs. using a forbidden tool to avoid doing the required work and gain an unjustified academic advantage (cheating). I'd tend to favour the cheating interpretation but since AI algorithms can sometimes regurgitate verbatim sections of the data they were trained on it can sometimes very clearly be plagiarism.
Either way, given the information available it seems very clear that the kid committed an academic offence.
Re: (Score:1)
Wow, so they put the effort to select parts of the AI's replay to include in the report?
That's nice. I usually just copy the whole reply for my kids' homework, because most homework is garbage busy work that doesn't enforce learning.