Month: May 2023

An Anniversary to Remember

Institute for Sexual Research in Berlin: “Un-German” and “Unnatural” Literature is Sorted Out for the Book-Burning Ceremony (undated photo, May 6-10, 1933). GHDI. © Bildarchiv Preußischer Kulturbesitz

I wasn’t aware, until I heard it on NPR this morning, that today is the 90th anniversary of the famous Nazi book burnings. This date is worth taking a moment to consider in light of ongoing efforts to ban books from public libraries and schools today. Like in the past, one of the main targets is any book containing knowledge about people marginalized for their sexual orientation and gender identity. One of the first targets of the book burnings (completed, it is worth underlining, largely by students) was Magnus Hirschfeld’s Institute for Sexual Research, which advocated for sexual reform and cared for queer people between World War I and the Nazi takeover. Today, the targets are graphic novels and young adult literature about LGBTQ+ people. But it’s all the same thing.

It was with this in mind that I read this morning that Indiana legislators defunded Indiana University’s Kinsey Institute, using the very same slur that was often used by Nazis against queer people in the 1930s: that they preyed on young people. It is hard to understand how we arrived at this point. Marriage Equality, we were told, would assimilate queer people into American society and reduce homophobia. And yet! One can only agree with Sam Huneke is in the linked article that the pursuit of normalization has only served to reify the divide between normal and abnormal that is used by homophobes and fearmongers.

Don’t Be that Guy

I kind of miss Twitter for making complaints like this, but at least now the complaint remains my own content I guess. Please don’t be that colleague who creates more work for their fellow faculty.

Last night one of my advisees e-mailed me asking how a professor changes an incorrect grade. The reason they e-mailed me is that their professor told them to figure it out and get back to them. The instructions for how to do this were contained in a message that goes out every semester to all faculty. It is entirely the responsibility of the faculty member who made the error. But because this colleague couldn’t be bothered to figure this out and instead put the burden on a first-year student, I had to take time to help. Was it much time? No. But it adds up when some of us take our responsibilities seriously and others do everything they can to offload their own work on others, even their own students.

AI and the Take Home Final

Even before the pandemic, I had been moving most of my examinations away from traditional in-class exams and toward a take-home format. This was mostly because it felt like a contradiction to try to teach students that history was not about the memorization of dates and then have them complete a timed exam for which memorization was a large component. In the wake of the pandemic, a take-home exam also felt more accessible: students could complete it at their own pace, focus on what they felt most comfortable, and use their own notes and the course materials at home. As of last semester, I was even having students brainstorm questions they would like to appear on the exam so that it could play to their strengths and encourage them to really think about what they learned in preparation for the exam.

This move had pluses and minuses. It certainly did decrease student anxiety about memorization. It also provided flexibility during the exam period. It allowed students to take a bit more control over their own learning at the end of the semester. However, especially in introductory courses, there were significant downsides. It was difficult to develop questions sufficiently tailored to the course to prevent cheating. Many responses did not show the kind of deep thinking I thought a take-home option would enable. Despite having access to all the information from the course (and the internet) answers remained superficial, without a great deal of detail in their argument or evidence.

These issues only became more severe this semester, in the middle of which ChatGPT and similar AI Chatbots dropped. I had, for most of the semester, taken a rather laissez-faire attitude to these tools, thinking that some students will inevitably cheat, but that its a minority group. However, what seems to have happened with my final is that rather than simply using ChatGPT to write an answer, a significant number of my students typed in the prompt, looked at the answer provided, and then wrote their own response around it. I have no proof of this and decided, after some thought, to not pursue it with the students.

Continue reading “AI and the Take Home Final”

Separation of Powers only works with Checks and Balances

I had planned on writing a post today on my experience teaching for the first time in the era of Chat GPT, but instead I can’t help but ask if someone, somewhere, could please inform our leading lights that the idea of separation of powers comes coupled with the idea of checks and balances. From today’s WaPo regarding the latest in Clarence Thomas’s obvious corruption:

We’re told that out there, in the constitutional ether, lies a strict separation of powers that precludes any interference by Congress and the president with the independence of judges. Lately, in the case of the upper chamber and the high court, that system looks like this: Durbin in a standoff with Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., in a battle of polite letters.

Who told us this? Because they are missing an important part! I remember that lesson in elementary school too! But it came quite clearly with the linked idea that each branch balanced one another out so that one could not exercise unjust power over the other (or over us). We’re in the midst of a power grab by the judiciary, so it might be good for Congress to remember that part too.

Won’t someone think of the educational needs of Supreme Court children?

What pushes the latest revelation about Clarence Thomas’s corruption from tragedy to farce is this justification from his sugar daddy Harlan Crow:

“Harlan Crow has long been passionate about the importance of quality education and giving back to those less fortunate, especially at-risk youth,” the statement said. “As part of his desire to perpetuate the American dream for all, and believing education is the great equalizer, he and his wife have supported many young Americans through scholarship and other programs at a variety of schools.”

Ah yes, we can all sympathize with the need to provide tuition for the at-risk adopted child of a Supreme Court Justice making a base salary of over $200k a year, plus the various book deals and “personal” gifts of Crow and others. How else would this poor child have gotten a quality education without the beneficence of this Republican billionaire? It’s hard to fathom.

I do wonder how much the “good” ones are partaking of these extra benefits as well…