When you teach a writing class and have students turn in legitimate outlines, rough drafts, and final papers, and then have the AI submissions from students who put in a subject and told the program to write a research paper, advertisement, journalistic article, or fictional story, you would come to different conclusions.
I refuse to grade students with high scores based on technically submitting an assignment if it was AI generated. I have plenty of students who do the work legitimately and deserve to have an honest grade.
To be (politely) blunt.
Your daughter failed her certification competency exam.
YOU did the research, YOU developed a recovery plan, YOU “wrote” the AI-assisted recovery plan, YOU analyzed the result and selected the AI-written recovery plan.
What exactly did your daughter do to learn the basics of her certification- other than regurgitate what your AI put in the recovery plan? Does she know her basics and core competency? Is she really able to do her job? Or just pass the state’s exam?
Tough questions.
I disagree. I’ve written code for over 40 years. I’ve never had a tool or class that taught me so much (regarding coding) in so short a time. My daughter failed a certification test. I pasted her scores for each module into AI and had it develop a 25 question study guide on each module, weakest to strongest, with links to explanations of each answer for further study.
That’s what I did to learn about AI.. I told Claude Desktop to put together a list of AI job interview questions that I had to answer, and make them progressively harder, and if I missed a question or didn’t answer it to its satisfaction, I would fail and I would have to start all over again. So in a way it’s like a game.
It can be a wonderful tool for learning if you use it the right way.