|
I re-read the abstract and they tried two different modes of ChatGPT-4, "base mode" and a "tutor mode". The tutor mode helped students more, but it cautioned at the end: > Our results suggest that students attempt to use GPT-4 as a "crutch" during practice problem sessions, and when successful, perform worse on their own. Thus, to maintain long-term productivity, we must be cautious when deploying generative AI to ensure humans continue to learn critical skills. I think the caution is the use of AI to circuit the real learning, even if AI is in a tutor mode, to avoid building up true grit. Ultimately, in writing this article, my hope was that a student would read it and get angry, angry that over use of AI - using it as a crutch - is actually having a negative impact on their learning, and they would resolve to using it only for more efficiency and effectiveness, not a substitution for the true learning. I was thinking of Richard Feynman’s approach to learning when writing this article. He was a genius, so I didn't want the analogy to be unrelatable. However, he really enjoyed understanding the first principles and that enjoyment gave him such a solid foundation. He put in the necessary hours to learn, and what a remarkable life he enjoyed because of it. |