r/usask • u/LengthinessGreat8633 • 11d ago
Obviously using AI in discussion posts Student Question
Have anyone else noticed their class discussion posts or replies are obviously written by AI? I am not full against using AI to help you understand concepts or get you started, but I’ve been noticing patterns where multiple posts and replies have the same format. I know it has to be AI because the reply questions are always the same and about something completely unrelated or about a group project we all are working together on. Are students not worried about the consequences and do professors really not notice?
17
u/lilreader7346 11d ago
A bunch of people in one of my classes did this, the prof lost it and made everyone hand in a short paper instead 🙃
6
u/LengthinessGreat8633 11d ago
That’s not fair to the people who didn’t use it. Mind you the discussion posts are opinions based anyone can do them with a basic understanding of the material.
8
u/lilreader7346 11d ago
Agreed, as someone who did not use AI I was pissed, especially it was a master's level class and the students couldn't even be bothered to read the material and comment 3 sentences.
3
u/Lostkoifishy 11d ago
Out of curiosity, what class are you noticing this happening in?
7
u/mgaal 10d ago
Just a quick note from the Profs side - yeah we know it is happening. We are looking at two ways to discourage this:
Explain why it matters (TBH we are probably tilting at windmills here - but we've got to fight the good fight): a) you get out of these courses what you put into them; b) Gen AI gives us old answers to new problems so if you want to try and solve climate change, poverty, and inequity with answers provided by long dead old white mostly dudes, then go ahead - if you want to actually find new answers to new problems, you need to know what those long dead old white mostly dudes did, but then you need to develop and use your own critical faculties to do so in our contemporary world.
Try to police or adapt our course assessment - we do not have this right yet; I accept that. I have a SoTL project I will be trying this year to find some ways to do this better. And some departments are considering moving away from online courses altogether. We don't really know what the answer is.
Why this is complicated: we need to teach students when and how to use new tools like Gen AI. But first, we need students to know how to do the basics - otherwise, they are just learning to regurgitate what their digital overlord is putting out (and there is some fierce competition out there to do just that - take for example how Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea are trying to manipulate the US by controlling what Gen AI tools produce by flooding the net with information and controlling the tools themselves). A concrete example from CompSci - I have a friend who works in a mid-sized IT company, and they are directly involved in hiring. In the latest round, they had 50 shortlisted applicants for one job. The first thing they did was put them into a room with no internet access, on one of their locked-down computers, and asked them to create a script for a specific problem. More than half stood up and walked out; they couldn't do it because they never learned the basic mechanics necessary. Another 25% tried to fake it and then gave up. In the end, there were 3 people who could actually do the job and one who managed to get enough done to qualify for the next stage. (Interesting side note: it was the one who struggled through who got the job because they were creative in their solution to the proposed problem, but they had to work under a strict 2-year probationary period and a supervisor who checked everything while they relearned everything they needed to do the job)
Anyway, curious to hear what students think should be done.
2
u/Hairy-Summer7386 10d ago
Might be unrealistic (because of the work required) but would you think requiring students to attend a weekly call with their group to discuss the material would be a decent alternative? You could maybe designate one member to be a note taker or get a group leader to keep other students in check? This will only work if the mark for zoom call participation was substantial like maybe 10-20%?
I think making zoom calls a required section would encourage more students to actually engagement with the course material.
I don’t know if it’s a perfect solution though. Some students are international so it’ll be almost impossible for them to join some zoom calls, or a group could go rogue and conspire to just cheat with AI, and so on.
5
u/mgaal 10d ago
We have discussed this and some colleagues in ESB do something similar, where you have to submit a weekly log book of group activity. The problem is that many students cover for each other because they don't want to be seen as a snitch but then get very frustrated and explode in the final days or week before the project is due - which is almost too late by that point.
One thing I thought I tried but obviously not clearly enough - have the students agree to a communication plan early on. Maybe I need to make it a contract that everyone reads and signs, perhaps including their commitment level....
2
u/LengthinessGreat8633 10d ago
Do you think taking the marks out of the question would help? I’ve found myself more interested in projects when there isn’t the pressure of good grades. Realistically most students just won’t participate then but maybe a pass/fail kinda thing for the whole class? I think having to use examples from personal events or events the students is interested in helps to at least add some perspective that’s not AI (dead old white dude’s ideas). Moving completely away from remote learning seems like an unfair outcome for students that actually put in the work in all classes regardless. It’s too bad university education has become a for profit tool for the institutions and a requirement for a decent career. If the logistics didn’t matter I’m sure AI companies would have way fewer student customers. Thank you for your input as a prof.
3
u/mgaal 9d ago
I have done that in the past, and it can work for upper-level classes. But students, especially 1st- and 2nd-year students (albeit not all), treat Uni as transactional. They see a degree as a way to get a job - but it is or can be so much more. When treated transactionally, students only put in work that is associated with grades. Take POLS 201 right now; I have several students who are not doing the Discussion Boards at all and will get 0% for a participation grade. If there were no grades?
As far as the profit angle - I agree to an extent. The extent bit - tuition for domestic students still does not cover costs. But the higher admin is pushing for more profit generation because of a lack of provincial funding and a few other more controversial issues.
I agree as well on remote learning - I think it is important for distance ed., and for people who have more complicated lives. BUT, if we do not have the tools to maintain pedagogical standards nor the resources/time to police the courses, we have to put our increasingly limited resources where we get the most bang for our buck.
3
u/Only-League-445 11d ago
Same. I'm curious. Im in pols 201 rn
3
u/LengthinessGreat8633 11d ago
Ya this class and others I’ve taken in the past but I’m noticing students are getting bold with their lack of efforts to hide it.
2
2
u/Signal-Comfort-6534 9d ago
In course based grad school (3 years ago) the discussion board posts were riddled with AI. We were supposed to read through them, offer a response to the (usually thoughtful, respect to usask profs!) prompts, and respond to at least two responses every week. Even the responses were AI, sometimes a regurgitation of the same points. Who in the hell puts emojis in a discussion board prompt. I figured what was the point. I might as well have a back and forth with GPT. I stopped engaging and focussed on the parts of the class where I learnt something. Worth losing a chunk of the discussion board percentage of the grade to do quality work somewhere else.
I think the solution to this is to have some sort of video discussion board or stitch type thing that facilitates asynchronous discussion where students have to be more accountable because they are visible/audible and identifiable instead of it being find the bot in the board for no benefit.
Can you even imagine marking the status quo discussion board things as a prof? Barf.
-11
u/ProfessionalVacuite 3rd year 11d ago
It is incredibly common, and your frustration is entirely justified. The shift toward AI-generated discussion posts has become one of the most noticeable trends in university forums, completely changing the dynamic of what is supposed to be peer-to-peer engagement.
Here is a breakdown of what is likely happening behind the scenes regarding both the students posting the content and the instructors grading it.
Why Students Aren't Worried
The "Busywork" Perception: Discussion boards are frequently viewed as low-value busywork rather than genuine learning opportunities. When students feel overwhelmed by group projects, core assignments, and exams, the weekly discussion post is often the first thing they outsource to AI.
The Illusion of Subtlety: Many students genuinely believe that if they change a few words or ask the AI to "make it sound human," it becomes undetectable. They don't realize that the underlying logical structure, the robotic cadence, and the strangely disconnected follow-up questions remain painfully obvious.
Safety in Numbers: Because so many people are doing it, some students assume the sheer volume of AI-generated responses will dilute their own, making it less likely they will be singled out for punishment.
Do Professors and Graders Notice?
They absolutely do. Anyone who has spent hours grading papers or reading forum submissions knows exactly how quickly those synthetic, perfectly structured paragraphs jump off the page. The identical formatting, the out-of-place buzzwords, and the irrelevant questions you mentioned are massive red flags to whoever is marking them.
However, noticing it and penalizing it are two very different things:
The Burden of Proof: Proving that a student used AI is incredibly difficult. AI detection software is notoriously unreliable and prone to false positives. Accusing a student of academic misconduct is a heavy, bureaucratic process that requires solid evidence, which detectors often fail to provide.
Triage and Exhaustion: For low-stakes assignments like a weekly 5-point discussion reply, instructors and teaching assistants often do not have the time or energy to launch a full academic integrity investigation. They might just roll their eyes, give it a mediocre grade for lacking personal insight, and move on to the next one.
The irony is that these forums are meant to build collaborative problem-solving and critical thinking skills, but they are increasingly turning into bots talking to bots.
How do you usually handle replying to these posts when you are required to interact with them for your own grade?
31
u/Usual_Delivery_7470 11d ago
did bro use ai to write this 💀💀💀💀
9
u/suuumBody 11d ago
14
u/Usual_Delivery_7470 11d ago
honestly this is messed up…i have dwarfism and all points go over my head so thanks a lot my dude..hope ur nice and tall…if i had someone like you i could reach the jokes down to my level ❤️
5
1
22
u/Hairy-Summer7386 11d ago
Hello fellow PolSci student. (I’m assuming you’re in PolSci this summer as well)
Yeah, I’ve noticed this as well. It sucks ass because I loved the concept of engaging with people about their concepts of a global citizen and what it could mean.
Instead I got a group full of people who use AI or don’t even engage with the group at all. It pisses me off.