Professor suspected AI-powered cheating on take-home midterms, makes finals in-person — only two students scored within 10% of their midterm score

a student using an AI tool to help answer a take-home exam
(Image credit: Getty Images)

Brown University professor Roberto Serrano suspected that his students were cheating when he gave them a take-home midterm exam, so he decided to make the final exam in-person. According to Inside Higher Ed, out of the 86 students enrolled in his class, 18 dropped from the class after he made the announcement, and nine skipped the final exam. Out of the 59 remaining students, three scored zero, and only two students received a grade that’s within 10% of their midterm score, with only one of them performing better in the finals.

Prof. Serrano, who taught Welfare Economics and Social Choice Theory (Econ 1170), usually conducted in-person exams for his class. However, the mass shooting on university grounds that happened last December made many students anxious about staying in classrooms, so he thought that it was just appropriate to let them take home exams. When news spread that the professor had such an arrangement, enrollment for his class ballooned to 86 students — more than double the usual 30 that he teaches in a particular semester.

The first sign of trouble came when he gave the take-home midterm exams. “Historically the average grade in the midterm of this course has ranged between 65 and 80 [percent], and this exam was harder than the exams I wrote in the past, because … take-home is an opportunity to challenge the class a little bit more, given that you’re giving the students unlimited time,” Serrano said, according to the publication. But this time, his class scored an average of 96%.

Latest Videos From

While some of the students might argue that he just happened to have a particularly gifted set of students this semester, the professor said that most of the answers were “kind of correct, but very off, and with a very convoluted style.” While they were technically correct, Serrano suspected that they were sourced from AI, especially after he ran the test through ChatGPT and received similar results.

Because of this, he emailed the class telling them about his suspicions — he made the final exam in-person and said that if the distribution is similar to the midterm exams, then he would count it towards their final grade. Otherwise, the midterms are void, and he’ll “reweigh the final accordingly.” But, as the data showed, it seemed that the majority of the class used AI during the midterm exams.

Prof. Serrano raised the issue with the university’s Standing Committee on the Academic Code, but it seemed that it didn’t take action until the story broke. Now, it seems that the university is going to review each case individually. In the meantime, Serrano is worried about the future. “We cannot afford to have a society in which a significant fraction of our best young minds think that cheating is OK,” the professor said to Inside Higher Ed. “That leads to a declining society, to a failed society … We cannot choose to become idiots.”

Google Preferred Source

Follow Tom's Hardware on Google News, or add us as a preferred source, to get our latest news, analysis, & reviews in your feeds.

Jowi Morales
Contributing Writer

Jowi Morales is a tech enthusiast with years of experience working in the industry. He’s been writing with several tech publications since 2021, where he’s been interested in tech hardware and consumer electronics.

  • heffeque
    University students externalizing thinking... what can go wrong!

    Businesses will be thrilled to hire this new generation of students.
    Reply
  • Trake_17
    The final sentence is exactly right. I don't care how much money a handful of Uber rich people have put behind it or how too big to fail they may be, we cannot allow ourselves to become a society of idiots.
    Reply
  • GenericUser2001
    Even before AI at home testing would be ripe for cheating potential. Honestly, I think colleges for the most part should just drop graded work that is done outside of class. They should still assign work that is useful in helping students actually learn the subject, but the actual assessment on if they have learned the subject should be done in class.

    The exception would be to assign more complex and difficult projects, and allow students to use AI (or whatever tools) to aid them in the projects. Though you would still want an in person Q&A about the project to make sure they fully understand it.
    Reply
  • USAFRet
    Trake_17 said:
    The final sentence is exactly right. I don't care how much money a handful of Uber rich people have put behind it or how too big to fail they may be, we cannot allow ourselves to become a society of idiots.
    I know people that slavishly follow the AI chatbots.

    A coworker will believe an AI bot vs an actual doctor or lawyer.
    Or any expert in any field...the AI bot is better.
    Reply
  • TheYar
    They all boo even the mention of AI at commencement, but use it any chance they get. What a sad lot.
    Reply
  • PEnns
    Trake_17 said:
    The final sentence is exactly right. I don't care how much money a handful of Uber rich people have put behind it or how too big to fail they may be, we cannot allow ourselves to become a society of idiots.

    It's even worse than just idiots: Cheating idiots!!
    If companies were to use similar testing procedures when hiring....maybe 1% of the applicants would get hired!!
    Reply
  • Kamen Rider Blade
    This is why "Take Home Tests" are now dead forever.

    You cannot realistically police every student to prevent then from using AI.

    The only answer is in class testing, no Smart Devices or LapTops.

    Pen & Paper Tests ONLY
    Reply
  • mwestall
    Trake_17 said:
    The final sentence is exactly right. I don't care how much money a handful of Uber rich people have put behind it or how too big to fail they may be, we cannot allow ourselves to become a society of idiots.
    From where we are the USA already has.
    Reply
  • cyrusfox
    When you get in to specialized and deep fields, AI use is easy to spot, and yields incorrect answers often, for these sort of generalized and early level classes, it does better than average but it stunts the students ability to reason independently and is a thief of learning.
    Reply
  • husker
    There is no replacement for critical thinking; however, any student entering the work force without experience in using AI to shortcut to the correct answer is at a disadvantage.
    Reply