A Debate Sparked by DeepSeek
A Chinese Class that keeps up with the times
Recently, our AP students and the Year 11 students of Royal Mile Academy had a debate event in their Chinese lessons with the theme of ‘Should the use of AI tools (such as DeepSeek) in assignments be considered fair? The debate not only demonstrated the students' critical thinking skills but also encouraged the school to think about how school education should respond to rapid technological changes.
Ivy Academy(AP) · Debate Competition
Royal Mile Academy(A Level) · Debate Competition
Should the Use of AI Tools (like DeepSeek)
in Assignments be Considered Fair?
Background of the Debate: New Topics In Education Triggered By AI Tools
The debate was inspired by an assignment in a literary analysis class. When interpreting Gu Cheng's ‘Generation’ and ‘Far and Near’ poems, one student completed the assignment with the help of DeepSeek, and the quality of his work was significantly better than that of other students, which put the teacher in a dilemma: should the student's work be graded as A according to the standard? This question quickly triggered more thoughts and discussions, and eventually became the core topic of the debate.
The debate was divided into three segments: Opening statement, Rebuttals/Cross-Examination and Summary&Closing statement, and both sides, the Affirmative Side and the Negative Side engaged in a heated debate on whether the use of AI tools in assignments is fair.
AI Tools Are an Aid to Learning and Should Be Seen As Fair Game
The Affirmative Side speakers advocate that AI tools are a product of technological advancement, and that students' ability to make reasonable use of these tools to enhance the efficiency and quality of their learning is in itself a demonstration of competence.
They point out that AI tools can help students better understand complex concepts and provide new perspectives, thus facilitating deep learning.
The Affirmative Side also emphasises that the future workplace and society will rely more and more on technology, and that students' mastery and rational use of AI tools is a necessary skill to adapt to the times.
Using AI Tools Should Not Be Seen as Fair Game
The Negative Side speakers pointed out that the use of AI tools may lead to students' over-reliance on technology and weaken their independent thinking and analytical skills.
They argued that the core of education is to develop students' critical thinking and creativity, and that the intervention of AI tools may make assignments lose their original meaning.
In addition, the opposing side emphasised that if AI tools are allowed, students who are not equipped or capable of using them will be on an uneven playing field.
In the Rebuttals/Cross-Examination session, both sides discussed in-depth on the topics of "whether AI tools weaken students' ability", "fairness of education resources", "future skills development", etc. The atmosphere was thick with intensity, as each speaker passionately defended their stance. The audience was on the edge of their seats, captivated by the fervent exchange of ideas.
Year 7 and Year 11 students participated in the debate as spectators and voted for the ‘Best Debater’ after the competition.
The two Chinese teachers made a comprehensive judgement according to the rules of the debate assessment in terms of argument logic, language expression, teamwork and other aspects, and finally chose the winner.
The teachers commented that the debate not only showed the students' critical thinking ability, but also reflected their deep thinking about the relationship between science and technology and education.
Chinese teacher Miss Iris
I think AI can help us students learn more efficiently, help us improve our homework accuracy and academic performance, and tell us a lot of things we don't know. However, AI is not helpful for increasing our independence, and it does not represent our true level of knowledge. Using AI is somewhat unfair, and is not conducive to academic integrity. ---Irving
We come to school to gain knowledge, not to produce a perfect piece of work, and if everyone was just there for an A*, it would be perfectly possible to write a perfect paper straight out of AI. Secondly, you can't progress using AI (copying down answers), the purpose of writing assignments is to revise what you've learnt in class, not to aim for a high mark. If everyone use AI, would people need to think? Everyone would just get a computer and ask the AI directly. But in that case, what is the nature of human beings? ---Yoyo
I'm with the opposite side. Although it's okay to use AI when doing homework, it's considered cheating to use AI in exams and proper situations. And using AI won't show your real level, so it won't help yourself. ---Year 7 Student
I support the opposite side. Because when we're studying, using AI will block us from exploring new knowledge. What AI replaces is the time we spend on thinking, if we take away all this time, then it's the same as taking away the time to learn, then what can we learn? ---Year 7 Student
School Should Keep Abreast of The Times & Develop Skills for the Future
The debate is not only a clash of ideas, but also a profound reflection on how school education should respond to technological changes. With the rapid development of AI technology, the future of education is not about banning AI or embracing AI, but in forging children's core competencies that can't be replicated by AI, which are judgement, critical thinking and creativity, etc.
As educators, we need to rethink our teaching goals and build multi-dimensional assessment criteria. From knowledge authority to growth guide, from providing standard answer to cultivating different way of thinking.
MIS always believes that the only ultimate answer for education to fight against technological alienation is to let each child blossoms with irreplaceable thoughts.
