←back to thread

How University Students Use Claude

(www.anthropic.com)
395 points pseudolus | 5 comments | 09 Apr 25 15:41 UTC | HN request time: 0.422s | source
Show context
dtnewman ◴[09 Apr 25 16:23 UTC] No.43633873[source]▶
> A common question is: “how much are students using AI to cheat?” That’s hard to answer, especially as we don’t know the specific educational context where each of Claude’s responses is being used.

I built a popular product that helps teachers with this problem.

Yes, it's "hard to answer", but let's be honest... it's a very very widespread problem. I've talked to hundreds of teachers about this and it's a ubiquitous issue. For many students, it's literally "let me paste the assignment into ChatGPT and see what it spits out, change a few words and submit that".

I think the issue is that it's so tempting to lean on AI. I remember long nights struggling to implement complex data structures in CS classes. I'd work on something for an hour before I'd have an epiphany and figure out what was wrong. But that struggling was ultimately necessary to really learn the concepts. With AI, I can simply copy/paste my code and say "hey, what's wrong with this code?" and it'll often spot it (nevermind the fact that I can just ask ChatGPT "create a b-tree in C" and it'll do it). That's amazing in a sense, but also hurts the learning process.

replies(34): >>43633957 #>>43634006 #>>43634053 #>>43634075 #>>43634251 #>>43634294 #>>43634327 #>>43634339 #>>43634343 #>>43634407 #>>43634559 #>>43634566 #>>43634616 #>>43634842 #>>43635388 #>>43635498 #>>43635830 #>>43636831 #>>43638149 #>>43638980 #>>43639096 #>>43639628 #>>43639904 #>>43640528 #>>43640853 #>>43642243 #>>43642367 #>>43643255 #>>43645561 #>>43645638 #>>43646665 #>>43646725 #>>43647078 #>>43654777 #
bko ◴[09 Apr 25 16:36 UTC] No.43634075[source]▶
When modern search became more available, a lot of people said there's no point of rote memorization as you can just do a Google search. That's more or less accepted today.

Whenever we have a new technology there's a response "why do I need to learn X if I can always do Y", and more or less, it has proven true, although not immediately.

For instance, I'm not too concerned about my child's ability to write very legibly (most writing is done on computers), spell very well (spell check keeps us professional), reading a map to get around (GPS), etc

Not that these aren't noble things or worth doing, but they won't impact your life too much if you're not interest in penmanship, spelling, or cartography.

I believe LLMs are different (I am still stuck in the moral panic phase), but I think my children will have a different perspective (similar to how I feel about memorizing poetry and languages without garbage collection). So how do I answer my child when he asks "Why should I learn to do X if I can just ask an LLM and it will do it better than me"

replies(40): >>43634150 #>>43634156 #>>43634179 #>>43634211 #>>43634224 #>>43634268 #>>43634272 #>>43634362 #>>43634379 #>>43634426 #>>43634553 #>>43634592 #>>43634594 #>>43634728 #>>43634751 #>>43634838 #>>43635045 #>>43638038 #>>43638584 #>>43638671 #>>43638992 #>>43639074 #>>43639153 #>>43639324 #>>43639407 #>>43639632 #>>43639682 #>>43639789 #>>43639811 #>>43639836 #>>43639840 #>>43640113 #>>43640256 #>>43641056 #>>43641103 #>>43641125 #>>43641204 #>>43642320 #>>43646786 #>>43646876 #
noitpmeder ◴[09 Apr 25 16:42 UTC] No.43634179[source]▶
This is an insane take.

The issue is that, when presented with a situation that requires writing legibly, spelling well, or reading a map, WITHOUT their AI assistants, they will fall apart.

The AI becomes their brain, such that they cannot function without it.

I'd never want to work with someone who is this reliant on technology.

replies(5): >>43634254 #>>43634290 #>>43634552 #>>43634696 #>>43642297 #
1. bko ◴[09 Apr 25 16:48 UTC] No.43634290[source]▶
Maybe 40 years ago there were programmers that would not work with anyone that use IDEs or automated memory management. When presented with a programming task that requires these things and you're WITHOUT your IDE or whatever, they will fall apart.

Look, I agree with you, I'm just trying to articulate to someone why they should learn X if they believe an LLM could help them and "an LLM won't always be around" isn't a good argument, because lets be honest, it likely will. This is the same thing as "you won't walk around all day with a calculator in your pocket so you need to learn math"

replies(3): >>43634543 #>>43634597 #>>43638570 #
2. Hasu ◴[09 Apr 25 17:07 UTC] No.43634543[source]▶
> This is the same thing as "you won't walk around all day with a calculator in your pocket so you need to learn math"

People who can't do simple addition and multiplication without a calculator (12*30 or 23 + 49) are absolutely at a disadvantage in many circumstances in real life and I don't see how you could think this isn't true. You can't work as a cashier without this skill. You can't play board games. You can't calculate tips or figure out how much you're about to spend at the grocery store. You could pull out your phone and use a calculator in all these situations, but people don't.

replies(1): >>43635029 #
3. gwervc ◴[09 Apr 25 17:11 UTC] No.43634597[source]▶
A lot of developers of my generation (30+) learned to program within a code editor and compile their project in command line. Remove the IDE and we can still code.

On the other hand my master 2 students, most of which learned scripting in the previous year, can't even split a project in multiple files after being explained multiple times. Some have more knowledge and ability than others, but a signifiant fraction is just copy-pasting LLM output to solve whatever is asked from them instead of trying to do it themselves, or asking questions.

4. dwaltrip ◴[09 Apr 25 17:47 UTC] No.43635029[source]▶
You are also likely to be more vulnerable to financial mishaps and scams.
5. rurp ◴[09 Apr 25 22:08 UTC] No.43638570[source]▶
I think the risk isn't just that LLMs won't exist, but that they will fail at certain tasks that need to get done. Someone who is highly dependent on prompt engineering and doesn't understand any of the underlying concepts is going to have a bad time with problems they can't prompt their way out of.

This is something I see with other tools. Some people get highly dependent on things like advanced IDE features and don't care to learn how they actually work. That works fine most of the time but if they hit a subtle edge case they are dead in the water until someone else bails them out. In a complicated domain there are always edge cases out there waiting to throw a wrench in things.