←back to thread

323 points timbilt | 5 comments | | HN request time: 0.806s | source
Show context
ratedgene ◴[] No.42129665[source]
I was talking to a teacher today that works with me at length about the impact of AI LLM models are having now when considering student's attitude towards learning.

When I was young, I refused to learn geography because we had map applications. I could just look it up. I did the same for anything I could, offload the cognitive overhead to something better -- I think this is something we all do consciously or not.

That attitude seems to be the case for students now, "Why do I need to do this when an LLM can just do it better?"

This led us to the conclusion:

1. How do you construct challenges that AI can't solve? 2. What skills will humans need next?

We talked about "critical thinking", "creative problem solving", and "comprehension of complex systems" as the next step, but even when discussing this, how long will it be until more models or workflows catch up?

I think this should lead to a fundamental shift in how we work WITH AI in every facet of education. How can a human be a facilitator and shepherd of the workflows in such a way that can complement the model and grow the human?

I also think there should be more education around basic models and how they work as an introductory course to students of all ages, specifically around the trustworthiness of output from these models.

We'll need to rethink education and what we really desire from humans to figure out how this makes sense in the face of traditional rituals of education.

replies(12): >>42129683 #>>42129718 #>>42129742 #>>42129844 #>>42130036 #>>42130165 #>>42130200 #>>42130240 #>>42130245 #>>42130568 #>>42135482 #>>42137623 #
brtkdotse ◴[] No.42129742[source]
> I refused to learn geography because we had map applications

Which is ironic, because geography isn’t about memorizing maps

replies(2): >>42129759 #>>42131212 #
mewpmewp2 ◴[] No.42129759[source]
Some parts of it were though.
replies(1): >>42129900 #
1. tbihl ◴[] No.42129900[source]
Almost all parts require it, but none are about it. That's how background knowledge works. If you can't get over the drudgery of learning scales and chords, you'll never learn music. The fact that many learners never understand this end goal is sad but doesn't invalidate the methodology needed to achieve the progression.
replies(2): >>42131274 #>>42134290 #
2. CuriouslyC ◴[] No.42131274[source]
> That's how background knowledge works. If you can't get over the drudgery of learning scales and chords, you'll never learn music.

Tell that to drummers

replies(1): >>42133523 #
3. 8note ◴[] No.42133523[source]
As a drummer, you need to learn your scales and chords. It still matters, and the way you interact with the music should be consistent with how the chords change, and where the melody is within the scale.

Your drumming will be "melodic" if you do so

replies(1): >>42133648 #
4. bobnamob ◴[] No.42133648{3}[source]
Not mention tuned drums
5. gg82 ◴[] No.42134290[source]
It would be interesting to test adults with the same tests that students were given. Plus some more esoteric knowledge. What they learned at school could then be compared to see new information that they learned after school... as well as information, skills that they didn't use after school. It may help focus learning on useful skills knowledge that people have learned... as well as information that they didn't learn in school that would be useful for them!