[HN Gopher] Purdue University Approves New AI Requirement for Al...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Purdue University Approves New AI Requirement for All Undergrads
        
       Author : rmason
       Score  : 32 points
       Date   : 2025-12-13 20:54 UTC (2 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.forbes.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.forbes.com)
        
       | conartist6 wrote:
       | Well that's a public embarrassment...
        
         | andy99 wrote:
         | That was my thought, it feels like something a career college
         | or high school would do. Are CS students going to have to take
         | a "how to talk to chat gpt course"? That's probably less
         | condescending than making an arts student or someone else that
         | doesn't need to have anything to do with LLMs have to sit
         | through it.
         | 
         | I though Purdue was a good school, these kind of gimmicks are
         | usually the province of low-tier universities trying to get
         | attention.
        
           | turtleyacht wrote:
           | Optimistically, the idea could be to push prerequisites to an
           | always-on, ever-available resource. Depending on the major,
           | skills could include organizing papers into outlines, using
           | Excel, or building a computer.
           | 
           | Professors can tailor lectures to narrower topics or
           | advanced, current, or more specialized subjects. There may be
           | less need to have a series of beginning or introductory
           | courses--it's assumed learners will avail themselves.
           | 
           | Pessimistically, AI literacy contributes to further erosion
           | of critical thinking, lazy auto-grading, and inability to
           | construct book-length arguments.
        
       | djoldman wrote:
       | The announcement is here:
       | 
       | https://www.purdue.edu/newsroom/2025/Q4/purdue-unveils-compr...
       | 
       | Where the actual news is:
       | 
       | > To this end, the trustees have delegated authority to the
       | provost, working with deans of all academic colleges, to develop
       | and to review and update continuously, discipline-specific
       | criteria and proficiency standards for a new campuswide
       | "artificial intelligence working competency" graduation
       | requirement for all Purdue main campus students, starting with
       | new beginners in fall 2026.
       | 
       | So the Purdue trustees have "delegated authority" to people at
       | the University to make a new graduation requirement for 2026.
       | 
       | Who knows what will be in the final.
        
         | gmfawcett wrote:
         | Delegated to the _provost and deans_. Who else would you expect
         | to hold accountable for developing a graduate attribute?
        
       | brian-armstrong wrote:
       | https://archive.ph/g1a1X
        
       | turtleyacht wrote:
       | Upfront computer literacy may have never been convincing enough;
       | AI could be the ubiquitous and timely leverage to open the way
       | for general machine thinking.
        
       | noitpmeder wrote:
       | How to Speedrun devaluing the credentials your institution exists
       | to award.
        
       | gamblor956 wrote:
       | This is going to be like when all the schools were pushing big
       | data because that was going to be the next big thing.
       | 
       | After more than a trillion dollars spent, LLMs can replace: (a) a
       | new secretary with one week of experience (b) a junior programmer
       | who just learned that they can install programs on a desktop
       | computer, and (c) James Patterson.
       | 
       | That's the bright future that Purdue is preparing its students
       | for.
       | 
       | Yes, AIs will be a huge thing...eventually...but LLMs are not AI,
       | and they never will be.
        
         | andy99 wrote:
         | This has nothing to do with whether the technology is valuable
         | or not, it's about cramming superficial treatment of trendy
         | topics into academic degree rewuirements, which whatever one
         | thinks of AI should be frowned upon.
        
         | ivape wrote:
         | It's definitely something that won't age well. Kids are going
         | to grow up with many AI friends by the time they get to
         | college.
        
       | keiferski wrote:
       | I don't really get the dismissive comments here. Universities
       | have had gen ed requirements for years, one of which is usually
       | something to do with computers. AI seems to be a technology that
       | will be increasingly relevant...so a basic gen ed requirement
       | seems logical.
        
         | alephnerd wrote:
         | These are the same people who would pooh-pooh teaching Excel
         | and basic coding skills to non-STEM majors or have CS students
         | take ethics or GenEd classes.
         | 
         | AI/ML isn't going to completely shift the world, but
         | understanding how to do basic prompt engineering, validate
         | against hallucinations, and know what the difference between
         | ChatGPT and GPT-4o is valuable for people who do not have a
         | software background.
         | 
         | Gaining any kind of knowledge is a net win.
        
           | hansmayer wrote:
           | "basic prompt engineering" - Since when has writing English
           | language sentences become nothing less than "engineering" ?
        
         | UncleEntity wrote:
         | Yeah, I'm still bitter I had to pass a literacy exam to get my
         | BA and that was 28 years ago.
         | 
         | And I just know this is going to turn into a (pearl-clutching)
         | AI Ethics course...
        
         | BeetleB wrote:
         | The problem is the field is changing way too fast. It's almost
         | certain that whatever they'll learn will be outdated/wrong/poor
         | practice by the time they graduate. Just compare with the state
         | of things 2 years ago.
        
       | jleyank wrote:
       | From my long-ago uni courses, current-day AI could have helped
       | with the non-major courses: English and History, doing the first
       | draft or even the final drafts of papers, etc. As a science
       | major, I'm not sure what the point of relying on an AI is as it
       | would leave you empty when considering further education or the
       | tests they require. And as far as a foreign language goes, one
       | needs to at least read the stuff without relying on Google
       | Translate (assuming they have such a requirement anymore).
       | 
       | But I like to think that actually learning the history was
       | important and it certainly was a diversion from
       | math/chemistry/physics. I liked Shakespeare, so reading the plays
       | was also worthwhile and discussing them in class was fun. Yeah, I
       | was bored to tears in medieval history, so AI could have helped
       | there.
        
         | conartist6 wrote:
         | It'll get you an academic integrity investigation if you get
         | caught using it to write either a first draft or a final draft
         | of a paper, and _especially_ for an English class where the
         | whole point is for you to learn how to write.
         | 
         | If you're going to try to fake being able to write, better to
         | try to dupe any other professor than a professor of English.
         | (source: raised by English majors)
        
       | dehrmann wrote:
       | Full disclose: I'm a Purdue graduate, though I disagree with
       | certain things the school has done (Purdue Global).
       | 
       | Part of this is very reasonable; AI is upending how students
       | learn (or cheat), so adding a requirement to teach how to do it
       | in a way that improves learning rather than just enhances
       | cheating makes sense. The problem with the broad, top-down
       | approach is it looks like what happens in Corporate America where
       | there's a CEO edict that "we need a ____ strategy," and every
       | department pivots projects to include that, whether or not it
       | makes sense.
        
         | daxfohl wrote:
         | I like this take. It seems like it would be useful to require
         | professors to sit in on the class too. It'd be interesting to
         | hear lots of different perspectives, ideas, concerns, etc.,
         | rather than a lecture format to half-awake students about
         | something they arguably know more about than the instructor.
        
       | mwkaufma wrote:
       | Heads up: forbes.com/sites/xyz are ppl and groups who pay for the
       | domain, but aren't edited or promoted by forbes itself. Almost
       | always conservative interest groups posing as journalists.
        
         | andy99 wrote:
         | Yes this has conservative psy-op written all over it /s
        
           | mwkaufma wrote:
           | Nietzel's whole shtick is "college reform" i.e. dismantling
           | and financialization. See his book "Coming to Grips with
           | Higher Education." Mixing non-agitprop into the feed is part
           | of agitprop.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-12-13 23:00 UTC)