Is the Blue Book a Threat to Generative AI?

(Photo via @atu_bookstore Instagram)

Christopher Panarese | Contributing Writer

The Blue Book has helped keep students’ work organized and original for nearly 100 years. Its versatility over numerous subjects and cheap cost have made it a favorite among universities across the country. While computer tests and digital school work seem like the future, many colleges are returning to traditional Blue Books to help combat cheating using generative artificial intelligence programs.

This begs the question: are Blue Books still state of the art or is it time to change the way educators test students? The Blue Book originated from Butler University and was first used in 1926. According to ThoughtCo, an education-focused website, its blue design was made to match their school colors and soon became popular across the United States.

Many other colleges such as Harvard and Yale caught on and made their own standardized testing book in their school colors as well. However, these books were more than just a fad. They were seen as revolutionary for keeping students’ writing organized and in a standardized system. They make grading contents easy and are cheap to produce, which is why the books are still popular to this day. Yet, some educators are ready to move past the Blue Book and on to the next best thing.

A group of two dozen professors at the University of North Carolina is trying to phase out the Blue Book with a computer software that locks students into a secure testing browser with only tools the professor can approve. This allows students to continue digital testing and typing, which is quicker than traditional handwriting. Regardless of these advancements, Blue Books are regaining popularity. Reportedly, the University of Florida saw a 50 percent increase in Blue Book sales over the past year. Much of these sales are driven by teachers’ fear of AI cheating. But are Blue Books the best solution to combat AI?

While reintroducing the Blue Book to prevent cheating with AI seems like a good idea, some evidence shows it’s a step backward. According to The Charlotte Observer, one professor at the University of North Carolina claims grading Blue Books can take two to three times as long as scoring tests delivered by computer. This is because deciphering messy handwriting is harder than having a typed paper. Not only does it take longer to grade, but it’s also more expensive. While Blue Books are relatively cheap, costing as little as 25 cents, a student should have one to two per class.

Many computers already come equipped with Microsoft Word or Google Docs, a free and effective alternative. Not to mention the amount of paper Blue Books consume, which adds to the long list of non-reusable school supplies. Overall, Blue Books take longer to grade, cost students more, and aren’t eco-friendly. So why are so many schools bringing them back?

While teachers find Blue Books to be used in the battle against AI cheating, one professor, Mr. Obermeyer, in the University of Dayton’s School of Engineering suggests, “Teachers have to have a more creative approach in an AI enabled world.”

He argues that tests and essays should revolve more around class discussions and problems. This way, students can take advantage of computers for testing, not cheating. One example is to have students write about an art piece they saw on campus and how it made them feel. AI lacks emotional understanding and probably doesn’t know who made the piece of art. With this approach, educators can re-establish faith in computer-based tests.

However, this change must come from the educator rather than the testing instrument. It’s the third choice that can be the compromise between the Blue Book and monitored computer tests.

Christine Schramm, associate vice president and dean of students at UD, has co-aligning ideas. “We have different ways of learning so we have to come up with different ways of teaching, and AI can be one of those,” she told Flyer News. Perhaps educators should focus attention on how they test and teach rather than what they use to test and teach. This new approach might seem difficult at first, but has the potential to be the classroom compromise educators and students needed.

There’s currently a divide between Blue Book advocates and those looking to implement newer technology for testing. People are unsure if Blue Books will keep us in the past or help push us into the future. If one thing is certain, educators can’t be afraid of change. They should embrace it. The Blue Book will have its 100th anniversary in a couple of months, and it will be interesting to see how its future unfolds. At the end of the day, it’s just pieces of lined paper, but soon it may evolve into something else.

EDITOR’S NOTE: Christopher Panarese is a first-year student enrolled in the Flyer News Practicum, which affords students interested in the media arts the opportunity to write, take photographs for, build display ads or create graphics for Flyer News. The Practicum is offered every fall and spring through the Department of Communication.