Does Using AI to Edit an Op-Ed on Students' Math Skills Undermine the Argument? (theguardian.com)
- Reference: 0185070776
- News link: https://news.slashdot.org/story/26/08/20/1729258/does-using-ai-to-edit-an-op-ed-on-students-math-skills-undermine-the-argument
- Source link: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/aug/19/uc-berkeley-professor-ai
> A math professor at the University of California, Berkeley, criticizing a "severe" math deficiency among students in an op-ed for the San Francisco Standard, [1]admitted to using artificial intelligence to help edit the piece . The Standard [2]published a 2,000-word piece by Zvezdelina Stankova last week, in which the professor said some of her math students were "five to eight years" behind and lacked a "middle school" education on fractions and basic algebra. Stankova said the UC system's test-blind admissions were to blame, suggesting that students who weren't sufficiently prepared for the rigor of Berkeley's mathematics program were admitted because a longstanding benchmark like the SAT had disappeared.
>
> Over the weekend, journalists at Berkeley's student newspaper, the Daily Californian, [3]noticed the op-ed's language sounded like AI. According to Berkeley sophomore Francis Luo, they ran it through AI-detection software Pangram, which claimed 33% of the op-ed had been generated or assisted by AI. In response, Stankova admitted she had used AI software to "help edit the piece" but that the article was "the result of several hundred person-hours of intensive human work, of which about 80 hours are my own."
>
> Stankova said by email she had used AI to locate "numerous documents and articles related to the initiative" but that "all analysis is the result of the team members." When asked about their AI usage policy, the Standard -- which published the op-ed -- shared this statement by email: "While AI may assist, our expectation is that humans are behind every article we publish and take responsibility for every word. Our understanding in working with the author of this op ed was -- and continues to be -- that this piece reflects her and her colleagues' extensive original analysis, research and expertise."
Should the op-ed have been entirely written without artificial assistance or is the use of AI a distraction from the argument at hand? That's the question at the heart of the [4]debate [5]playing out [6]online .
According to the op-ed, Stankova and her peers found that the number of students with a "severe deficit" in their readiness for a calculus I class had tripled after the University of California adopted test-blind admissions. Some students were allegedly five to eight years behind and struggling with basic algebra and fractions, among other concepts.
Much of that decline, Stankova argues, is from the removal of standardized tests like the SAT and ACT, which served as important benchmarks for identifying whether applicants were prepared for Berkeley-level coursework.
[1] https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/aug/19/uc-berkeley-professor-ai
[2] https://sfstandard.com/opinion/2026/08/15/uc-berkeley-sat-test-blind-admissions-math-scores/
[3] https://www.dailycal.org/news/campus/uc-berkeley-professor-admits-to-using-ai-in-op-ed-calling-out-students-lack-of/article_be1360f7-6e2a-42f6-ae76-f05d8cee74c4.html
[4] https://www.reddit.com/r/berkeley/comments/1vs6sva/uc_berkeley_professor_discloses_ai_use_in_oped/
[5] https://x.com/maattttbrown/status/2089783266459218308
[6] https://www.reddit.com/r/mathematics/comments/1vrqm31/uc_berkeley_professor_admits_to_using_ai_in_oped/
Calc 101 (Score:2)
You're going to jump into Calculus 101 without 3 years of algebra? I probably would but I'm sure I would do terribly.
Re: (Score:2)
> You're going to jump into Calculus 101 without 3 years of algebra? I probably would but I'm sure I would do terribly.
Someday, you'll make a fine overly confident, but incompetent, initially beloved by some, then hated by most President - or replacement South Carolina Senator. :-)
Doesn't it support it? (Score:3)
Granted it's in a different discipline, but the instructor having to use AI to write backs up the claim that people are forgetting things by using AI. It's a bit ironic for other reasons, but still supports the point.
Re: (Score:2)
> Granted it's in a different discipline, but the instructor having to use AI to write backs up the claim that people are forgetting things by using AI. It's a bit ironic for other reasons, but still supports the point.
On the other hand, she was born in Bulgaria, so English is probably a second language, so getting help writing a piece to be published doesn't seem unreasonable. I imagine she also had other people review a more completed revision before submission.
ApplesGPT to OrangesGPT (Score:2)
No evidence was given that math skills are atrophying because of AI, nor was that even claimed in the op-ed, which criticizes slipping testing standards.
Re: (Score:2)
the instructor having to use AI to write backs up the claim that people are forgetting things by using AI.
Where did it say they had to use AI? And is asking an AI to proofread something that much different than MS Word flagging spelling and grammar errors?
Completely different (Score:5, Insightful)
Can't believe this is even a story. Of course it doesn't matter. There are differences between what the Professor is complaining about and using A.I. to help write her opinion piece: 1) It's a completely different subject area. She's a math teacher, not an English teacher. But even an English teacher might use A.I. to assist in writing an opinion piece that has nothing to do with his/her academic life. 2) It wasn't coursework. If she was doing it in an English CLASS maybe there would be a point. 3) She was writing an opinion piece for wide distribution. It makes sense to get some assistance in doing so, and/or helping do the research to support the piece. That's exactly the type of thing A.I. is actually useful for.
Re: (Score:3)
> Can't believe this is even a story. Of course it doesn't matter. There are differences between what the Professor is complaining about and using A.I. to help write her opinion piece: 1) It's a completely different subject area. She's a math teacher, not an English teacher. But even an English teacher might use A.I. to assist in writing an opinion piece that has nothing to do with his/her academic life. 2) It wasn't coursework. If she was doing it in an English CLASS maybe there would be a point. 3) She was writing an opinion piece for wide distribution. It makes sense to get some assistance in doing so, and/or helping do the research to support the piece. That's exactly the type of thing A.I. is actually useful for.
What really hits me wrong here is it sounds like the AI was used in the editing process, not the writing process. While I personally have opted out of using AI for editing due to concerns they'll be skimming my fiction for training data, I can't fault somebody for wanting to have any type of technological editing help if they aren't primarily focused on language in their own field. I mean, technically, anyone that relies on something like Grammarly, which happens in several business settings, is using AI to
Re: (Score:2)
when i first read the op-ed it sounded "AI" to me also. (the op-ed [1]https://sfstandard.com/opinion... [sfstandard.com] )
things like:
"We didn’t end up with one somewhat weaker calculus class. We ended up teaching two different classes in one lecture hall: ".
It also had some weird maximalist phrases. like "piling students at exactly zero". And a section title like "The math collapse". to me these all read like structures that Gemini writes when i argue with it about things.
Like it really likes to write "pun
[1] https://sfstandard.com/opinion/2026/08/15/uc-berkeley-sat-test-blind-admissions-math-scores/
Re: (Score:2)
I think the point is that if a math teacher can use AI to write a paper and thereby elevating their skills without any investment, then why can't a dumb student use AI to do the same? Eventually we'll all be dumb as rocks and require an AI to do basic thinking so we can get back to the important things, like masturbating and watching tv. It's kind of a moot point, really, because convenience always wins out in the end.
Re:Completely different (Score:5, Insightful)
Would like to add one tidbit because I've had this same conversation at work. The professor stated they used AI to help edit only after hundred of hours of writing. In other words, they did the heavy lifting and only used AI at the end to help refine what they had already done.
Is this any different than a human editor? If I write a book, do what I can to edit it down, then go to an editor who makes suggests, removes or reorders parts, and so on, is that any different than having AI do the same thing? In both cases you wrote the words. In both cases you went somewhere else to help edit.
If people claim that using AI to edit a work is "cheating" because it's no longer your work, then the same should apply to a human editor.
Re: (Score:3)
Yeah, A.I. is fine when it's used as a tool. Heck, we all used to use calculators in school even when doing Calculus. It wasn't doing the Calculus for us, just simple calculations. Even now, I'm a sysadmin who used to do a lot of programming but not really any more. But I still do some scripting and A.I. has saved me a lot of hours on things that honestly are pretty simple but just not things that I do on a daily basis any more. So I come up with a framework and ask A.I. to help with syntax or the spec
Re: (Score:2)
This is a basic straw man. The op-ed mentions AI once, almost as an aside.
+12, Insightful (Score:2)
Completely agree, this is a bullshit gotcha from people with deficient math and reasoning skills.
My Zoomer kids loathe their contemporaries for a reason.
Re: (Score:2)
If your title is 'Professor', that should imply you don't need help with basic things like writing your ideas into a coherent paper or essay.
If AI was only used as an editor for grammar and spelling it shouldn't be flagging an AI detector - so either the AI detector sucks or AI wrote actual full sentences of her op-ed. The latter is lazy.
It's a shame this detracts from the point that colleges are allowing students in that are ill equipped to get any return for the their money paid to the school. That
This is a bit extreme (Score:5, Informative)
First, I haven't seen any articles yet claiming that these "AI detection tools" don't have a high false positive rate anyways, so those tools alone are controversial.
Second, if AI's job, like any tool, is to make our lives easier, then editing something seems like a good use of the technology. When i write stuff, I often will get all my thoughts down as best as I can, but then use AI to evaluate if the message can come across in a more impactful way with fewer words, which helps to make it clearer for my intended recipient. In that the AI isn't generating the information at all, it's doing what it's actually good at, ie looking at text and recommending changes based on what people who are better writers might do. Particularly someone like this professor whom, just by judging based on her name, English is likely her second language so she may not be the best at communicating in writing. If that's what we're talking about here, this seems like a non-controversy.
No! (Score:3)
AI has nothing to do with anything here. The crtical component that we should be facing is:
> the professor said some of her math students were "five to eight years" behind and lacked a "middle school" education on fractions and basic algebra.
University students lacking middle school level fractions and basic algebra? That is horrendous!
Wait (Score:3)
It took hundreds of person hours AND help from AI to say: "today's students aren't prepared to take Calculus 1...now get off my manicured lawn!"?
Regardless, most students at Berkeley don't need Calculus 1. And if students do need it, but aren't ready, then send them to the next class down until they are ready.
And complaining about not having the SAT or ACT...? Just do your own math placement test, Berkeley, it's not difficult. Seems like a problem that Berkeley could solve, rather than whining about it in an op-ed. Sheesh.
Re: (Score:3)
> Regardless, most students at Berkeley don't need Calculus 1. And if students do need it, but aren't ready, then send them to the next class down until they are ready.
Calculus 1 pretty much is the lowest-level math class at Berkeley. There's a math fundamentals refresher class, which is for people who are pretty much at pre-calculus level. But if they're saying students really don't understand fractions, it's a mystery how they even got into Berkeley. California has an amazing community college system that will teach you all the way down to basic algebra if you need it, and once you spend a couple of years there, there are easy avenues to transfer to the many high-qualit
Re: (Score:2)
I seriously doubt admissions is boiled down to merit. They'll look at your community service, race and income as well. Why any of that has anything to do with academics is beyond me. It's almost like they bring on students that might not necessarily be qualified to be there for "reasons".
P.S. Yes, I know technically they can't use race anymore but there are other ways to inference the same information. I'm quite sure each application isn't assigned a number to prevent this either. Clark Davis is probably no
Re: (Score:2)
> I seriously doubt admissions is boiled down to merit
It's high school GPA in a set of courses and class rank (top 9%). Class rank is always an odd factor to use because it helps those who are in a school with an overall lower academic performance level (because it is 'easier' to get into top 9%); but being in a lower academic performing high school is generally bad for your *personal* performance because there are fewer students to push you and usually those schools don't offer the most rigorous or AP courses. There's also an "exceptions" pathway for students
Re: (Score:3)
The person whining likely does not have the influence on campus to get admissions to actually do such a math test of their own. That is a good idea though. My community college did this for me 25 years ago as I didn't do SAT or ACT because I knew I was just going to community college anyway. I took a couple placement tests and they recommended classes based on such.
The ironic thing for me, I some how managed to get recommend pre-calc but really wasn't ready for it. I ended up eventually just taking an easie
No (Score:2)
Apples and oranges, generated drama and clickbait. Move along..
Numberphile podcast discussion with Stankova on it (Score:2)
The Numberphile podcast has a discussion with Professor Stankova about this issue with information on the history and studies about it.
To be fair to the professor ... (Score:2)
To be fair, she's a Math teacher, not an English or writing teacher - [1]Wilipedia says [wikipedia.org] born in Bulgaria, so I'm guessing English is a second language - so her getting help from AI with the writing part is different than if it had helped her with any math in the article, which I couldn't tell from TFA as it's paywalled, and it's different than her math students getting help or answers from AI on math assignments - the thing they're there to learn. To round this out, students getting help from AI explaining a
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zvezdelina_Stankova
Strawman / Ragebait (Score:3)
The Professor in question barely mentioned AI. Instead The Guardian ran a hit-piece on her that doesn't even properly engage with her points until more than halfway through.
This is the only mention of AI in the whole piece:
> General learning loss would lower the entire distribution. It would not hollow out the middle while piling students up at exactly zero. Something else appears to be compounding the problem. Whatever the mix of causes, the problems at UC accelerated precisely when the system discarded the one standardized baseline it once had. Without standardized tests, admissions officers are flying blind, especially as grade inflation has made transcripts a weaker indicator of readiness, and artificial intelligence has made admissions essays a weaker signal of students’ work.
And as The Guardian article says "Stankova, in her email, said “the issue of how AI was used is orthogonal to and a distraction from the thousands of hours our team has put into the initiative” of reinstating standardized tests in admission."
College Course (Score:2)
It's a college course. If you fail the course, you get an F. Then it is up to the university's policies for if and how you get to continue. This isn't that hard.
If the college graduates people who have not completed the coursework to a certain standard, it becomes much more difficult to hire from that college.
how to test whether an argument is undermined (Score:2)
If the math professor had written the article without AI assistance, would the students' math skills have improved?
Well of course they are focusing on AI. (Score:5, Insightful)
Because we sure as fuck aren't going to focus on the poor mathematics skills of our youth. Much much easier to attack the messenger then actually debate the salient points being made by the Op-Ed.
Now I personally enjoy writing so I'm not likely to invoke AI for a template or setup piece to edit. I would however allow AI to assist me in research. Sure, I'd need to verify that, but that's true regardless. You always need to verify your sources when you are writing anything. Well, real journalist and academics would anyway. Just a couple years ago I was finishing a degree and I had a end of year project to build. It required I list all my sources to backup what I was ultimately submitting. Shame we have a lot of lazy frauds that would rather just cheat.
So yes, I'm quite sure the Internet is attacking this person's AI assisted Op-Ed because they know it's correct but don't want to face the music that we're doing a major disservice to our youth by letting them slide on Math. IE letting them slide on critical thinking and logic. Who needs logic when we can just appeal to emotion, like Trump!
Re: (Score:2)
I agree. AI may or may not be wonderful, but it's becoming a buzzword that's used to automatically label something (or someone) as fraudulent. Whatever use the author may have made of AI, the article should be critiqued on its merits, not on how it was created.
Re: (Score:2)
Excellent take! She used AI for research, probably to proofread, so what? As you said, let's focus on the lack of basic math skills that student have developed. I have one daughter who just finished grade 11, and one who just finished grade 8, both have the math skills of a grade 3 student. The schools kept telling us bullshit like: "She can work with numbers, like the great math geniuses of all time." If I ask either of my daughters to multiple 20 x 14 in their head, they will honestly take 5+ minutes,