메뉴
BL
404 Media 33일 전

교수들 분노, 강의 무단 AI 가공

IMP
7/10
핵심 요약

애리조나주립대학(ASU)이 교수들의 동의 없이 강의 영상을 무단으로 잘라내어 저품질의 AI 학습 모듈을 생성하는 플랫폼 'Atomic'을 출시했습니다. 이 과정에서 강의 문맥이 파괴되고 심각한 오역과 부정확한 정보가 발생해 학내 교수진들의 거센 반발을 사고 있습니다. 이 사건은 기관이 교육자의 지식재산권과 노동력을 존중하지 않고 AI를 무단으로 적용할 때 발생할 수 있는 심각한 윤리적 갈등을 보여줍니다.

번역된 본문

애리조나주립대학교(ASU)는 ASU 교수진의 강의를 가져와 긴 동영상을 매우 짧은 클립으로 자른 뒤, 이를 기반으로 텍스트와 섹션을 생성하여 AI 기반 학습 모듈을 만드는 'Atomic'이라는 플랫폼을 도입했습니다. 제가 만나본 Atomic에 강의가 포함된 교수와 학자들은 자신의 강의가(어떤 경우에는 문맥이 동떨어진 극도로 짧은 클립으로) 이런 식으로 활용되는 것에 대해 불쾌감을 드러냈으며, 상당수는 플랫폼 출시에 대해 배신감을 느끼거나 분노한다고 말했습니다. 대부분의 교수진은 학교로부터 어떤 통지도 받지 못했고, 구전을 통해 이 사실을 알게 되었다고 밝혔습니다. 또한, 저와 다른 사람들이 Atomic을 테스트한 결과, 학술적으로 수준이 낮거나 부정확한 콘텐츠가 도출되었습니다. ASU는 학계 구성원들에게 그들의 강의가 AI 플랫폼에 의해 편집되어 그럴듯하게 재조합될 것이라고 전혀 소통하지 않았을 뿐만 아니라, 결과물로 나온 모듈의 퀄리티 역시 형편없습니다.

💡 ASU Atomic에 대해 추가로 아시는 내용이 있거나, 여러분의 학교에서 AI가 어떻게 도입되고 있는지 알고 계신가요? 제게 연락해 주시면 감사하겠습니다. 업무용 기기가 아닌 개인 기기를 사용해 Signal(sam.404)로 안전하게 메시지를 보내주시거나, sam@404media.co로 이메일을 보내주시면 됩니다.

학교 내 AI 도입은 매우 논란이 많은 주제입니다. 'AI 기반 사립 학교'인 알파 스쿨(Alpha School)이나, 학생 대신 AI 에이전트가 학생의 삶을 살아주어 학습이 전혀 필요 없다는 식의 실험이 그 예시입니다. 이번 사례의 경우, 문제가 된 AI 도구는 대학이 교수진의 노동력을 활용해 직접 만들었지만 정작 그 교수진과는 어떠한 협의도 거치지 않았다는 점이 특징입니다.

Atomic FAQ 페이지에는 "우리는 정식 출시 전 학습자 경험을 개선하기 위해 무엇이 효과가 있는지 알아보기 위해 ASU Atomic의 초기 버전을 테스트하고 있습니다."라고 명시되어 있습니다. "구독을 시작하면 학습 목표와 일정에 맞춰 무제한으로 맞춤형 학습 모듈을 생성할 수 있습니다." FAQ에는 ASU 동문 및 "ASU의 학습 이니셔티브에 관심을 표명했거나 ASU Atomic 구축에 기여한 연구에 참여한 사람들"이 베타 테스트에 초대되었다고 적혀 있습니다. 하지만 월요일 오전, 저는 개인 이메일 주소로 Atomic 플랫폼의 12일 무료 체험에 가입했습니다. ASU 소속이 전혀 필요하지 않았습니다.

저는 블루스카이(Bluesky)에 ASU 미국 문학 교수인 크리스 한론(Chris Hanlon)이 이 플랫폼에 대해 게시한 글을 보고 처음 이 플랫폼의 존재를 알게 되었습니다. 한론 교수는 "Atomic이 생성한 모듈 자료에서 저 자신의 얼굴과 제가 아는 사람들의 얼굴, 그리고 모르는 다른 사람들의 얼굴을 보고 정말 놀랐다"고 말했습니다. 그의 강의의 일부였던 12분짜리 영상에서 문학 평론가 클린스 브룩스(Cleanth Brooks)를 언급하는 1분짜리 짧은 발췌 영상을 잘라냈는데, AI는 이를 'Client(고객)' Brooks로 잘못 전사했습니다. 한론 교수는 "그 영상에 담긴 내용은 훨씬 더 많은 문맥이 없다면 누구도 이해할 수 없는 것이었다"고 덧붙였습니다. 그가 자신의 강의 영상이 해당 모듈에 포함된 동료 교수들에게 연락했을 때, 그들 모두 똑같이 충격과 경악을 금치 못했다고 말했습니다. "물론 이런 일은 우리 모두에게 항상 어느 정도 일어나지만, 소속 기관이 그런 짓을 하다니... 내가 일하는 대학이 허락 없이 내 초상과 강의, 자료를 사용하여 내가 진짜 어떤 교사인지 전혀 반영하지 않는 방식으로 이들을 마구잡이로 자른다는 것은 있을 수 없는 일입니다. 현실 세계의 실제 학생에게 그런 것을 제공한다는 것은 말할 것도 없고요."

이 영상들은 ASU의 학습 관리 시스템인 Canvas에서 스크래핑된 것으로 보입니다. Canvas는 학생들에게 강의 자료와 수업 토론을 제공하는 곳으로, Instructure가 소유하고 있으며 미국 내에서 가장 인기 있는 학습 관리 시스템 중 하나로 많은 대학이 사용하고 있습니다.

Atomic FAQ 페이지에는 "ASU Atomic은 현재 비즈니스, 재무, 기술, 리더십, 역사 등을 포함한 ASU Online의 모든 과목의 강의 콘텐츠 라이브러리를 활용합니다. ASU에서 가르치는 것이라면 무엇이든 당신의 AI 학습 파트너인 Atom이 이를 중심으로 초개인화된 학습 모듈을 구축할 수 있습니다."라고 적혀 있습니다. 월요일 오후, 제가 ASU Atomic의 이메일 주소로 코멘트를 요청한 후 Atomic의 가입이 중단되었습니다. 하지만 기존 로그인 정보를 사용하면 여전히 새로운 모듈을 만들 수 있었습니다. 제가 직접 테스트한 결과...

원문 보기
원문 보기 (영어)
Arizona State University rolled out a platform called Atomic that creates AI-generated modules based on lectures taken from ASU faculty by cutting long videos down to very short clips then generating text and sections based on those clips. Faculty and scholars I spoke to whose lectures are included in Atomic are disturbed by their lectures being used in this way—as out-of-context, extremely short clips some cases—and several said they felt blindsided or angered by the launch. Most say they weren’t notified by the school and found out through word of mouth. And the testing I and others did on Atomic showed academically weak and even inaccurate content. Not only did ASU allegedly not communicate to its academic community that their lectures would be spliced up and cannibalized by an AI platform, but the resulting modules are just bad. 💡 Do you know anything else about ASU Atomic specifically, or how AI is being implemented at your own school? I would love to hear from you. Using a non-work device, you can message me securely on Signal at sam.404. Otherwise, send me an email at sam@404media.co. AI in schools has been highly controversial, with experiments like the “AI-powered private school” Alpha School and AI agents that offer to live the life of a student for them, no learning required. In this case, the AI tool in question is created directly by a university, using the labor of its faculty—but without consulting that faculty. “We are testing an early version of ASU Atomic to learn what works, and what doesn't, to further improve the learner experience before a full release,” the Atomic FAQ page says. “Once you start your subscription, you may generate unlimited, custom built learning modules tailored specifically to your learning goals and schedule.” The FAQ notes that ASU alumni and those who “previously expressed interest in ASU's learning initiatives or participated in research that helped shape ASU Atomic” were invited to test the beta. But on Monday morning, I signed up for a free 12 day trial of the Atomic platform with my personal email address — no ASU affiliation required. I first learned about the platform after seeing ASU Professor of US Literature Chris Hanlon post about it on Bluesky . “When I looked at it, I was really surprised to see my own face, and the faces of people I know, and others that I don't know” in module materials generated by Atomic, Hanlon said. It had clipped a one-minute snippet from a 12 minute video he’d done as part of a lecture mentioning the literary critic Cleanth Brooks, which the AI transcribed as “Client” Brooks. “What was in that video did not strike me as something anyone would understand without a lot more context,” Hanlon said. When he contacted his colleagues whose lecture videos were also in that module, they were all just as shocked and alarmed, he said. “I mean, it happens to all of us in certain ways all the time, but have your institution do it—to have the university you work for use your image and your lectures and your materials without your permission, to chop them up in a way that might not reflect the kind of teacher you really are... Let alone serve that to an actual student in the real world.” The videos appear to be scraped from Canvas, ASU’s learning management system where lecture materials and class discussions are made available to students. Canvas is owned by Instructure , and is one of the most popular learning management systems in the country, used by many universities. “ASU Atomic currently draws from ASU Online's full library of course content across subjects including business, finance, technology, leadership, history, and more. If ASU teaches it, Atom—your AI learning partner—can build a hyper-personalized learning module around it,” the Atomic FAQ page says. As of Monday afternoon, after I reached out at the ASU Atomic email address for comment, signups on Atomic were closed. I could still make new modules using my existing login, however. In my own test, I went through a series of prompts with a chatbot that determined what I wanted my custom module to be. I told it I was interested in learning about ethics in artificial intelligence at a moderate-beginner level, with a goal of learning as fast as possible. Atomic generated a seven-section learning module, with sections that repeated titles (“Ethics and Responsibility in AI” and “AI Ethics: From Theory to Practice”). The first clip in the first section is a two-minute video taken from a lecture by Euvin Naidoo, Thunderbird School of Management's Distinguished Professor of Practice for Accounting, Risk and Agility. In it, Naidoo talks about “x-riskers,” who he defines as “a community that believes that the progress and movement and acceleration in AI is something we should be cautious about.” Atomic’s AI transcribes this as “X-Riscus,” and transfers that error throughout the module, referring to “X-Riscus” over and over in the section and the quiz at the end. The next section jumps directly into the middle of a lecture where a professor is talking about a study about AI in healthcare, with no context about why it’s showing this: In a later section, film studies professor and Associate Director of ASU’s Lincoln Center for Applied Ethics, Sarah Florini, appears in a minute-long clip from a completely unrelated lecture where she briefly defines artificial intelligence and machine learning. But the content of what she’s saying is irrelevant to the module because it came from a completely unrelated class and is taken out of context. “It makes me feel like somebody that's less knowledgeable about me, they're going to be naive about these positions, and they're going to think either that an ‘expert’ said it so therefore it must be true" “This was a video from one of the courses in our online Film and Media Studies Masters of Advanced Study. The class is FMS 598 Digital Media Studies. It is not a course about AI at all,” Florini told me. “It is an introduction to key concepts used to study digital media in the field of media studies.” She recorded it in 2020, before generative AI was widely used. “That slide and those remarks were just in there to get students to think of AI as a sub-category of machine learning before I talked about machine learning in depth. That is not at all how I would talk about AI today or in a class that focused more on machine learning and AI tech technologies,” she said. “It’s really a great example of how problematic it is to take snippets of people teaching and decontextualize them in this way.” Florini told me she wasn’t aware of the existence of the Atomic platform until Friday. “I was not notified in any way. To the best of my knowledge no faculty were notified. And there was no option to opt in or out of this project,” she said. Another ASU scholar I contacted whose lecture was included in the module Atomic generated for me (and who requested anonymity to speak about this topic) said they’d only just learned about the existence of Atomic from my email. They searched their inbox for mentions of it from the administration or anyone else, in case they missed an announcement about it, but found nothing. Their lecture snippet presented by Atomic was extremely short and attempted to unpack a very complex topic. “I don't love the idea of my lectures being taken out of the context of my overall course, and of the readings for that module, and then just presented as saying something,” they told me. “It makes me feel like somebody that's less knowledgeable about me, they're going to be naive about these positions, and they're going to think either that an ‘expert’ said it so therefore it must be true... Or they're gonna think, that's obviously fucking stupid, this ‘expert’ must be dumb. But I could have been presenting a foil!” The clips are so short, it's impossible in some cases to discern context at all. That lecturer told me the idea of their work being chopped up and used in this way was less a matter of