100% in a classroom setting but that’s not what this is. It’s not reasonable for the organizers of this national competition to be demanding source code, peer review it, understand it, and then asking the entrant to explain the code and how things work.
Keep running it, and let the ones who can learn learn? Although it was formatted as a competition, the main point of it was to assist learning, and that wouldn’t change for the kids who did put in the effort. If necessary, remove the competition part.
The main point of this was the competition, the fun was the competition for both the kids and the organizers/judges. Turning it into something else isn’t a solution to the problem the organizers were attempting to fix here since again the point and the fun here was the competition.
What’s the proposed solution for being able to easily differentiate student made projects and pure AI slop?
I’d love to know and see the games myself. There was not a single kid mentioned in the article. It mentions “some kids” did it, but the article is speculation citing a reddit post, no one knows if AI was the reason for the programs shutdown from what I read.
That same person also suggested, however, that funding cutbacks could have been an even bigger factor in the decision, saying that “projects like this are the first to get cut” when government budgets get tight.
Are they learning anything when you take the fun exercise away from the motivated kids?
That’s more my issue.
If the other kids are using AI fix THAT. Don’t take away the fun projects.
Well then give us the solution then to this problem of being able to easily differentiate student made projects and pure AI slop.
I’m sure the organizers and judges of this competition who literally started they cannot easily do so would love your answer.
Ask the student to explain how their program works in front of the class, with time for questions at the end.
They’ll still be able to start with vibe code, but they’ll be forced to actually think.
100% in a classroom setting but that’s not what this is. It’s not reasonable for the organizers of this national competition to be demanding source code, peer review it, understand it, and then asking the entrant to explain the code and how things work.
Keep running it, and let the ones who can learn learn? Although it was formatted as a competition, the main point of it was to assist learning, and that wouldn’t change for the kids who did put in the effort. If necessary, remove the competition part.
The main point of this was the competition, the fun was the competition for both the kids and the organizers/judges. Turning it into something else isn’t a solution to the problem the organizers were attempting to fix here since again the point and the fun here was the competition.
What’s the proposed solution for being able to easily differentiate student made projects and pure AI slop?
You missed the point. No one was doing the “fun exercise”.
I can’t read the article because of adblock, was there truly not a single kid that submitted something not vibecoded?
I’d love to know and see the games myself. There was not a single kid mentioned in the article. It mentions “some kids” did it, but the article is speculation citing a reddit post, no one knows if AI was the reason for the programs shutdown from what I read.
Feels like AI is engagement bait here 🪤