One report here. (LINK FIXED.) What are your schools doing? Submit your comment only once, it may take awhile to appear.
Rex Martin was a first class person with a sharp intellect and wry sense of humor. He was an excellent…
News and views about philosophy, the academic profession, academic freedom, intellectual culture, and other topics. The world’s most popular philosophy blog, since 2003.
Rex Martin was a first class person with a sharp intellect and wry sense of humor. He was an excellent…
21. Is style the last refuge against AI?
All about class.
*important caveat that said TT job was secured via an internal hire where two other grads of the same school…
Excellent questions! Re question 6, I have actually already invented a new punctuation mark. I can’t type it here, as…
29. Should competitive examination questions obey Betteridge’s Law?
It’s likely that Notre Dame will return to a policy of requiring GREs next year (this year they’re officially optional…
One report here. (LINK FIXED.) What are your schools doing? Submit your comment only once, it may take awhile to appear.
This is a topic that is addressed at some length in my co-authored draft with Jon Choi and Amy Monahan, Lawyering in the Age of Artificial Intelligence (https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4626276). In short, our view is that use of generative AI should be banned in the first-year of law school, and this ban should be implemented not just through an honor code (which is likely to be ineffective over time because it is practically impossible to detect cheating) but through requirements that assessments be completed in person using a lock-down browser. Once students advance past their first year of law school (at which point they should have achieved basic proficiency in legal analysis), our approach changes and we encourage law schools to develop classes that specifically teach students how to use GenAI effectively.
Leave a Reply