<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>acbart</author><text>I won&amp;#x27;t speak about upper-division courses, but in the introductory computing courses, I&amp;#x27;m dealing with students who still don&amp;#x27;t know the fundamentals but want to use the LLMs to &amp;quot;augment&amp;quot; their skills. But it&amp;#x27;s like trying to rely on a calculator before you learn how to do addition by hand... and the calculator sometimes misfires. They don&amp;#x27;t know enough to debug the stuff coming out, because they still don&amp;#x27;t yet have the fundamental problem-solving skills or understand the core programming techniques. In the hands of an expert (or even someone with moderate knowledge), I think these tools can be great. But there needs to be a period of development WITHOUT these tools too. &amp;quot;If you&amp;#x27;re nothing without the suit, then you shouldn&amp;#x27;t have it.&amp;quot;</text><parent_chain><item><author>hyperthesis</author><text>\devil&amp;#x27;s advocate: If the augmented-student pair performs at the required level, what&amp;#x27;s the problem? The test should be how good they are at using LLMs. Tools should be absorbed.&lt;p&gt;Similar to today, when grades are a proxy for ability, but private tutoring puts an average student in the 2% (Bloom&amp;#x27;s 2σ problem) &lt;i&gt;for that stage&lt;/i&gt;, but doesn&amp;#x27;t boost the student&amp;#x27;s general intelligence for the next stage. Also, hard work, self-discipline, and focus will increase grades but not GI. (Of course, stidents do learn that specific stage, necessary for the next stage, so this criticism is just for use as a proxy).&lt;p&gt;We might say what is really be evaluated is the ability to get good grades (duh) - whether through wealth or work.&lt;p&gt;The same argument can be applied to LLMs. Using they is an important ability... so let&amp;#x27;s test that. This is the future. Similar to calculators and open-book exams.</text></item><item><author>theprivacydad</author><text>The main issue that is not addressed is that students need points to pass their subjects and get a high school diploma. LLMs are a magical shortcut to these points for many students, and therefore very tempting to use, for a number of normal reasons (time-shortage, laziness, fatigue, not comprehending, insecurity, parental pressure, status, etc.). This is the current, urgent problem with ChatGPT in schools that is not being addressed well.&lt;p&gt;Anyone who has spent some time with ChatGPT knows that the &amp;#x27;show your work&amp;#x27; (plan, outline, draft, etc.) argument is moot, because AI can retroactively produce all of these earlier drafts and plans.</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>Teaching with AI</title><url>https://openai.com/blog/teaching-with-ai</url></story>
<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>Gimpei</author><text>Writing is as much about organizing your thoughts and learning how to build an argument as it is about putting words on the page. It is about learning how to think. If students rely on an LLM, they will never get a chance to practice this essential skill, and, in my opinion, will be a lot dumber as a result.</text><parent_chain><item><author>hyperthesis</author><text>\devil&amp;#x27;s advocate: If the augmented-student pair performs at the required level, what&amp;#x27;s the problem? The test should be how good they are at using LLMs. Tools should be absorbed.&lt;p&gt;Similar to today, when grades are a proxy for ability, but private tutoring puts an average student in the 2% (Bloom&amp;#x27;s 2σ problem) &lt;i&gt;for that stage&lt;/i&gt;, but doesn&amp;#x27;t boost the student&amp;#x27;s general intelligence for the next stage. Also, hard work, self-discipline, and focus will increase grades but not GI. (Of course, stidents do learn that specific stage, necessary for the next stage, so this criticism is just for use as a proxy).&lt;p&gt;We might say what is really be evaluated is the ability to get good grades (duh) - whether through wealth or work.&lt;p&gt;The same argument can be applied to LLMs. Using they is an important ability... so let&amp;#x27;s test that. This is the future. Similar to calculators and open-book exams.</text></item><item><author>theprivacydad</author><text>The main issue that is not addressed is that students need points to pass their subjects and get a high school diploma. LLMs are a magical shortcut to these points for many students, and therefore very tempting to use, for a number of normal reasons (time-shortage, laziness, fatigue, not comprehending, insecurity, parental pressure, status, etc.). This is the current, urgent problem with ChatGPT in schools that is not being addressed well.&lt;p&gt;Anyone who has spent some time with ChatGPT knows that the &amp;#x27;show your work&amp;#x27; (plan, outline, draft, etc.) argument is moot, because AI can retroactively produce all of these earlier drafts and plans.</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>Teaching with AI</title><url>https://openai.com/blog/teaching-with-ai</url></story>