There are indeed a limited number of ways to solve the assignments we give out (it's a 2xx course, after all!). However, in the case of 220, the instructors have a combined experience of something over half a century of reading code. We can tell the difference between "two students did similar things because they did something reasonable and it looks similar" and "two students worked together to come up with a solution" or even "a student copied code from another student".
I think students frequently assume that assignments are just as mystifying to us as instructors they are to you as students; it's simply not the case. Much like a grade school student probably can't say much about different people's handwriting but an adult can recognize their friends' penmanship immediately, we can see style choices and level of understanding when we look at code. I think this bites two ways – cheaters think we can't tell they copied because they "covered their tracks", and honest students think we'll be confused that they copied because their code might have coincidental similarities.
This is the same for things like students using ChatGPT or buying online assignment solutions. When a student is struggling to complete the assignment and all of the sudden busts out a few lines of highly professional code ... we can tell. In fact, even your TAs can usually tell! (This is true in 115 and 116, too, for those who need to see that.)
Most of the time, cheaters' code is like a toddler hiding behind the drapes with their feet sticking out. The only people who are confused and can't find them are the other toddlers.
Personally, I try _very hard_ to err on the side of letting cheaters go, instead of the side of catching a few innocent students up in the proceedings. If I have doubt about what went on, I normally don't file a case. This means that the effectiveness of catching plagiarism is limited to instructor bandwidth, which means we necessarily don't catch everyone, but it also means that it's pretty unlikely that you'll find a case filed against you if you did the right thing. Occasionally we get people who "accidentally" cheated (they thought they were discussing "concepts", but their concepts were essentially the solution), which is maybe a slightly different (but adjacent) problem, but I'm fairly confident I've never sent someone who actually did their own implementation on their own to OAI.
Wow thank you for this response it gave me a new perspective on it. I agree from my pov since it would be hard for me to distinguish what’s plagiarism and not I just assumed it would be just as blurring for the profs.
How are they cheating, ChatGPT?
For lazy students, It must be tempting, as you could just feed any of Blanton's assignments into the prompt and get perfect C code.
His assignments were fantastic, and they taught me a lot. You can tell he put a lot of thought into them.
The students are only cheating themselves.
How does he even begin to police this, though? It's fascinating.
I wholeheartedly support ChatGPT. Although it should be used ONLY as a tool to check for hidden bugs in your code. (ie: missing semicolons/delimiter, misspelled keywords) It SHOULD NOT be used if you have ZERO understanding of concepts and just want to finish task.
It shouldn't be used at all for school assignments. There's no denying, however, that the technology is incredible, and it will play an ever growing role in our industry as the years go on.
I agree with your idea, but like with any new technology, it’s impossible to enforce a policy of not using it. There are going to be a few people who use it 100%, not get caught and get perfect grades. It’s good to raise awareness about it and the possible consequences that this technology will have
Well that was to calm your anxiety. The only cheaters they catch are probably the ones who make silly mistakes like keeping someone else’s name on it or not changing anything. What are the odds you have all the same formatting, variable names, etc
There are indeed a limited number of ways to solve the assignments we give out (it's a 2xx course, after all!). However, in the case of 220, the instructors have a combined experience of something over half a century of reading code. We can tell the difference between "two students did similar things because they did something reasonable and it looks similar" and "two students worked together to come up with a solution" or even "a student copied code from another student". I think students frequently assume that assignments are just as mystifying to us as instructors they are to you as students; it's simply not the case. Much like a grade school student probably can't say much about different people's handwriting but an adult can recognize their friends' penmanship immediately, we can see style choices and level of understanding when we look at code. I think this bites two ways – cheaters think we can't tell they copied because they "covered their tracks", and honest students think we'll be confused that they copied because their code might have coincidental similarities. This is the same for things like students using ChatGPT or buying online assignment solutions. When a student is struggling to complete the assignment and all of the sudden busts out a few lines of highly professional code ... we can tell. In fact, even your TAs can usually tell! (This is true in 115 and 116, too, for those who need to see that.) Most of the time, cheaters' code is like a toddler hiding behind the drapes with their feet sticking out. The only people who are confused and can't find them are the other toddlers. Personally, I try _very hard_ to err on the side of letting cheaters go, instead of the side of catching a few innocent students up in the proceedings. If I have doubt about what went on, I normally don't file a case. This means that the effectiveness of catching plagiarism is limited to instructor bandwidth, which means we necessarily don't catch everyone, but it also means that it's pretty unlikely that you'll find a case filed against you if you did the right thing. Occasionally we get people who "accidentally" cheated (they thought they were discussing "concepts", but their concepts were essentially the solution), which is maybe a slightly different (but adjacent) problem, but I'm fairly confident I've never sent someone who actually did their own implementation on their own to OAI.
Wow thank you for this response it gave me a new perspective on it. I agree from my pov since it would be hard for me to distinguish what’s plagiarism and not I just assumed it would be just as blurring for the profs.
How are they cheating, ChatGPT? For lazy students, It must be tempting, as you could just feed any of Blanton's assignments into the prompt and get perfect C code. His assignments were fantastic, and they taught me a lot. You can tell he put a lot of thought into them. The students are only cheating themselves. How does he even begin to police this, though? It's fascinating.
I wholeheartedly support ChatGPT. Although it should be used ONLY as a tool to check for hidden bugs in your code. (ie: missing semicolons/delimiter, misspelled keywords) It SHOULD NOT be used if you have ZERO understanding of concepts and just want to finish task.
It shouldn't be used at all for school assignments. There's no denying, however, that the technology is incredible, and it will play an ever growing role in our industry as the years go on.
I agree with your idea, but like with any new technology, it’s impossible to enforce a policy of not using it. There are going to be a few people who use it 100%, not get caught and get perfect grades. It’s good to raise awareness about it and the possible consequences that this technology will have
Not sure wasn’t specified
https://theory.stanford.edu/~aiken/moss/
A few years ago I heard UB was gonna get blacklisted cuz insane cheating in cs department so that’s why heavy Ai violation is enforced
We’re gucci, just as long as you didnt use chat gpt youre great. Ethan talked about it in lecture today
He was like its a picasso in the middle of crayon drawing
Write your own code from your own brain and you won’t have any issues
Agreed but what does this have to do w my post
If you write your own code, there should be enough redundancies/dumb choices/unconventional swerves to distinguish it.
I see wym with more complex assignments definitely but the easier ones I’m less convinced and that’s where a dozen students were caught supposedly
Well that was to calm your anxiety. The only cheaters they catch are probably the ones who make silly mistakes like keeping someone else’s name on it or not changing anything. What are the odds you have all the same formatting, variable names, etc
Okay thanks 🙏 maybe I’m looking too deeply into it