안녕하세요, 경희대학교 영자신문사 The University Life의 *** 기자입니다.
저희 신문사는 오는 1월 발간 예정인 신문에 “대학가 AI 부정행위”를 주제로 한 기사를 준비하고 있습니다. 이에 대해 교수님의 의견을 듣고자 연락을 드렸습니다.
이번 기사는 사태에 대한 대학의 대응 현황 및 향후 교육 방향에 초점을 맞추고 있습니다.
이와 관련해 교수님께서 언론 인터뷰에서 보여주신 분석을 인상 깊게 참고하였는데, 교수님의 전문적인 견해가 기사 완성도를 높이는 데 큰 도움이 될 것이라 생각하여 이렇게 인터뷰를 요청을 드립니다.
Question 1
In the current moment of rapid transition to the AI era, what problems do you see in traditional exam structures? Answer: Traditional exams focus on recall and summary skills, which are now easily performed by AI, meaning they no longer measure a student’s own cognitive ability. In an AI era, assessment should recognize the expanded human capacity — the ability to use tools thoughtfully, integrate information, and generate new ideas beyond simple memorization.
Question 2
Are the recent AI-cheating scandals related to limitations in existing evaluation methods? Answer: Yes — these scandals show a structural flaw in evaluation: our current systems reject the reality that human cognition is now augmented by AI and digital tools. When exams ignore this expanded form of intelligence, students are pushed toward unauthorized use rather than being taught how to integrate AI responsibly.
Question 3
How should universities change their exam and evaluation systems to align with rapid AI development? Answer: Universities should shift from measuring what students can produce alone to assessing how they extend their capabilities through AI — how they define problems, select information, and justify decisions using augmented tools. This approach values higher-order thinking while still keeping the learner, not the machine, at the center of evaluation.
Question 4
Can ethical guidelines alone solve AI-cheating issues? What else needs improvement? Answer: Ethical guidelines are helpful, but real improvement comes when assessments evaluate students’ augmented intelligence — how they combine their own reasoning with technological tools in a transparent and responsible way. When evaluation finally aligns with how people work in the real world, AI misuse decreases because students are rewarded not for hiding AI, but for using it wisely.
🔑 한 문장 핵심 메시지
The goal is not to assess whether students can avoid AI, but whether they can use AI to expand their intelligence in a responsible and transparent way.
박한우교수TV- 빅로컬빅펄스
박한우 교수님께,
안녕하세요, 경희대학교 영자신문사 The University Life의 *** 기자입니다.
저희 신문사는 오는 1월 발간 예정인 신문에 “대학가 AI 부정행위”를 주제로 한 기사를 준비하고 있습니다. 이에 대해 교수님의 의견을 듣고자 연락을 드렸습니다.
이번 기사는 사태에 대한 대학의 대응 현황 및 향후 교육 방향에 초점을 맞추고 있습니다.
이와 관련해 교수님께서 언론 인터뷰에서 보여주신 분석을 인상 깊게 참고하였는데, 교수님의 전문적인 견해가 기사 완성도를 높이는 데 큰 도움이 될 것이라 생각하여 이렇게 인터뷰를 요청을 드립니다.
Question 1
In the current moment of rapid transition to the AI era, what problems do you see in traditional exam structures?
Answer: Traditional exams focus on recall and summary skills, which are now easily performed by AI, meaning they no longer measure a student’s own cognitive ability. In an AI era, assessment should recognize the expanded human capacity — the ability to use tools thoughtfully, integrate information, and generate new ideas beyond simple memorization.
Question 2
Are the recent AI-cheating scandals related to limitations in existing evaluation methods?
Answer: Yes — these scandals show a structural flaw in evaluation: our current systems reject the reality that human cognition is now augmented by AI and digital tools. When exams ignore this expanded form of intelligence, students are pushed toward unauthorized use rather than being taught how to integrate AI responsibly.
Question 3
How should universities change their exam and evaluation systems to align with rapid AI development?
Answer: Universities should shift from measuring what students can produce alone to assessing how they extend their capabilities through AI — how they define problems, select information, and justify decisions using augmented tools. This approach values higher-order thinking while still keeping the learner, not the machine, at the center of evaluation.
Question 4
Can ethical guidelines alone solve AI-cheating issues? What else needs improvement?
Answer: Ethical guidelines are helpful, but real improvement comes when assessments evaluate students’ augmented intelligence — how they combine their own reasoning with technological tools in a transparent and responsible way. When evaluation finally aligns with how people work in the real world, AI misuse decreases because students are rewarded not for hiding AI, but for using it wisely.
🔑 한 문장 핵심 메시지
The goal is not to assess whether students can avoid AI, but whether they can use AI to expand their intelligence in a responsible and transparent way.
4 days ago | [YT] | 3