Metacognitive laziness: Effects of generative AI on learning motivation • Hacker News Board

Re: Metacognitive laziness: Effects of generative AI on learning motivation

#211

Post by aylmao » Tue, Jan 21, 2025, 6:59 PM UTC

MetaWhirledPeas wrote: post #75

_aavaa_ wrote: post #56

A preprint is available on arxiv [0], see the top of page 18 for what metacognitive laziness is: "In the context of human-AI interaction, we define metacognitive laziness as learners’ dependence on AI assistance, offloading metacognitive load, and less effectively associating responsible metacognitive processes with learning tasks." And they seem to define, implicitly, “metacognitive load” as the cognitive and metaco…

> In the context of human-AI interaction, we define metacognitive laziness as learners’ dependence on AI assistance, offloading metacognitive load, and less effectively associating responsible metacognitive processes with learning tasks. This sounds like parents complaining when we use Google Maps instead of a folding map. Am I worse at reading a regular map? Possibly. Am I better off overall? Yes. Describing it as "…

> "Dependence on [_____] assistance" is the point of all technology.

I will note two things though.

1. Not all technology creates "dependence". Google Maps removes the need of carrying bulky maps, or buy new ones to stay updated, but someone who knows how to read Google Maps will know how to read a normal map, even if they're not as quick at it.

2. The best technology isn't defined by the "dependence" it creates, or even the level of "assistance" it provides, but for what it enables. Fire enabled us to cook. Metalworking enabled us to create a wealth of items, tools and structures that wouldn't exist if we only had wood and stone. Concrete enabled us to build taller and safer. Etc.

It's still unclear what AI chatbots are enabling. Are LLM's big claim to fame allowing people to answer problem sets and emails with minimal effort? What does this unlock? There's a lot of talk about allowing better data analysis, saving time, and vague claims of an ai revolution, but until we see X, Y and Z, and can confidently say "yeah, X, Y and Z are great for mankind, and they couldn't have happened without chatbots", it's fair for people to keep complaining about the change and downsides AI chatbots are bringing about.

Re: Metacognitive laziness: Effects of generative AI on learning motivation

#212

Post by jmmcd » Tue, Jan 21, 2025, 7:00 PM UTC

In my recent programming exam (in an MSc in AI), I asked students to reflect on how generative AI has changed their coding. Almost all remarked that it's a great time-saver, but it makes them lazy and worse at coding.

And yes indeed, their ability to answer basic questions about coding on the same exam has drastically dropped versus last year.

Re: Metacognitive laziness: Effects of generative AI on learning motivation

#213

Post by tarkin2 » Tue, Jan 21, 2025, 7:00 PM UTC

engineer_22 wrote: post #68

roydivision wrote: post #45

This stands to reason. If you need the answer to a question, and you can either get it directly, or spend time researching the answer, you're going to learn much more with the latter approach than the former. You may be disciplined enough to do more research if the answer is directly presented to you, but most people will not do that, and most companies are not interested in that, they want quick 'efficient', 'compet…

We have accounts from the ancient Greeks of the old-school's attitude towards writing. In the deep past, they maintained an oral tradition, and scholars were expected to memorize everything. They saw writing/reading as a crutch that was ruining the youth's memory. We stand now at the edge of a new epoch, reading now being replaced by AI retrieval. There is concern that AI is a crutch, the youth will be weakened. My o…

Writing has ruined our memories. It would be far better if we were forced to recite things (incidentally, in some educational system they're made to recite poetry to remedy this somewhat); not that I'm arguing against letters and the written word.

And AI will make us lazier and reduce the amount of cognition we do; not that I'm arguing against using AI.

But the downsides must be made clear.

Re: Metacognitive laziness: Effects of generative AI on learning motivation

#214

Post by photochemsyn » Tue, Jan 21, 2025, 7:05 PM UTC

probably_wrong wrote: post #50

agentultra wrote: post #11

So humans are supposed to review all of the code that GenAI creates. We’re supposed to ensure that it doesn’t generate (obvious?) errors and that it’s building the “right thing” in a manner prescribed by our requirements. The anecdotes from practitioners using GenAI in this way suggest it’s a good tool for experienced developers because they know what to look out for. Now we admit folks who don’t know what they’re do…

> Do they know when the GenAI is bullshitting them? Anecdote from a friend who teaches CS: this year a large number of students started adding unnecessary `break` instructions to their C code, like so: while (condition) { do_stuff(); if (!condition) { break; } } They asked around and realized that the common thread was ChatGPT - everyone who asked how loops work got a variation of "use break() to exit the loop", so t…

If you take the generated code snippets and ask something like "There may or may not be something syntactically or stylistically wrong with the following code. Try to identify any errors or unusual structures that might come up in a technical code review.", then it usually finds any problems or at least, differences of opinion on what the best approach is.

(This might work best if you have one LLM critique the code generated by another LLM, eg bouncing back and forth between Claude and ChatGPT)

Re: Metacognitive laziness: Effects of generative AI on learning motivation

#215

Post by dragonwriter » Tue, Jan 21, 2025, 7:08 PM UTC

jmmcd wrote: post #212

In my recent programming exam (in an MSc in AI), I asked students to reflect on how generative AI has changed their coding. Almost all remarked that it's a great time-saver, but it makes them lazy and worse at coding. And yes indeed, their ability to answer basic questions about coding on the same exam has drastically dropped versus last year.

Is the problem the use of AI in coding, or using AI in coding in a curriculum designed without that assumption? Because if AI is an effort-saver, than a curriculum that isn't designed with its use in mind will just result in the students doing less work, in which case learning less is unsurprising but not really an "AI makes you less knowledgeable" problem but an "insufficiently challenging curriculum for the actual context" problem.

Re: Metacognitive laziness: Effects of generative AI on learning motivation

#216

Post by aylmao » Tue, Jan 21, 2025, 7:15 PM UTC

Arainach wrote: post #196

motorest wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The real danger lies in their seductive nature - over how tempting it becomes to immediately reach for the nearest LLM to provide an answer rather than taking a few moments to quietly ponder the problem on your own. I get the point you're trying to make. However, quietly pondering the problem is only fruitful if you have the right information. If you don't, best case scenario you risk wasting time reinventing the w…

>wasting time reinventing the wheel for no good reason Nearly all of learning relies on reinventing the wheel. Most personal projects involve reinventing wheels, but improving yourself by doing so.

Very much this.

Some of the most memorable moments I had in my learning were when I "reinvented" something. In high-school, our math teacher had us reinvent the derivative rules, and later had us derive Euler's identity through Taylor Series. They were big eureka moments. Going through all the work someone else did hundreds of years ago is very inspiring, and IMO gets you in the right mindset for discovery. I can't imagine where the joy of learning comes for someone who sees learning as a test —a question, an answer, nothing in between.

In uni we built a CPU from scratch over the course of a few weeks. First building an small ALU, widening its bus, adding memory operations, etc. Beyond learning how things work, it makes you wonder how inventing this without a teacher to guide you must've been, and gives you an appreciation for it. It also makes you extrapolate and think about the things that haven't been invented or discovered yet.

In theory LLMs could serve as a teacher guiding you as you reinvent things. In practice, people just get the answer and move on. A person with experience teaching, who sees how you're walking the path and compares it to how they walked theirs, will know when to give you an answer and when to have you find it yourself.

One doesn't learn how to do lab-work in the library.

Re: Metacognitive laziness: Effects of generative AI on learning motivation

#217

Post by Nevermark » Tue, Jan 21, 2025, 7:16 PM UTC

reaperman wrote: post #210

Nevermark wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can't disprove global warming by pointing out an extra cool evening. But I don't understand your point even as stated. Cars took over from horses as technology provided transport with greater efficiencies and higher capabilities than "horse technology". Subsequently transport technology continued improving. And continues, into new forms and scales. How do you see the alternative, where somehow horses were ... bre…

Cars do not strictly have higher capabilities than horses. GP was pointing out that horses can think. On a particularly well-trained horse, you could fall asleep on it and wake up back at your house. You can find viral videos of Amish people still doing this today.

Ah, good point. Then the global warming point applies, but in a much less trivial way.

There is turbulence in any big directed change. Better overall new tech often creates inconveniences, performs less well, than some of the tech it replaces. Sometimes only initially, but sometimes for longer periods of time.

A net gain, but we all remember simpler things whose reliability and convenience we miss.

And some old tech retains lasting benefits in niche areas. Old school, inefficient and cheap light bulbs are ironically, not so inefficient when used where their heat is useful.

And horses fit that pattern. They are still not obsolete in many ways, tied to their intelligence. As companions. As still working and inspiring creatures.

--

I suspect the history of evolution is filled with creatures getting that got wiped out by new waves, that were more generally advanced, but less advanced in a few ways.

And we have a small percentage of remarkable ancient creatures still living today, seemingly little changed.

Re: Metacognitive laziness: Effects of generative AI on learning motivation

#218

Post by MarcelOlsz » Tue, Jan 21, 2025, 7:19 PM UTC

redcobra762 wrote: post #194

sanderjd wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really think the ability to ask questions entirely free from all judgment is an under-emphasized aspect of the power of these tools. Yes, some people are intellectually secure enough to ask the "dumb" questions of other humans, but most people are not, especially to an audience of strangers. I don't think I ever once asked a question on Stack Overflow, because it was easy to see how the question I worried might be…

The tool is absolutely biased, what makes you think it wouldn’t be?

This guy is obviously unfamiliar with Tay lol.

Re: Metacognitive laziness: Effects of generative AI on learning motivation

#219

Post by twobitshifter » Tue, Jan 21, 2025, 7:31 PM UTC

65 wrote: post #128

ziddoap wrote: post #67

I'm certainly of two minds on this. On one hand, this reminds me of how all of the kids were going to be completely helpless in the real world because "no one carries a calculator in their pocket". Then calculators became something ~everyone has in their pocket (and the kids ended up just fine). On the other hand, I believe in the value of "learning to learn", developing media literacy, and all of the other positives…

It's astounding to me that people just like... always trust whatever the LLM says. I have some friends who use ChatGPT for everything. From doing work to asking simple questions. One of my friends wanted a bio on a certain musician and asked ChatGPT. It's a little frightening he couldn't, you know, read the Wikipedia page of this musician, where all of the same information is and there are sources for this material.…

I agree, at first I thought gpt would be used by tech savvy folk, but now it is clear that it’s becoming a crutch. My friend couldn’t respond to an email without it.

Re: Metacognitive laziness: Effects of generative AI on learning motivation

#220

Post by throw4847285 » Tue, Jan 21, 2025, 7:33 PM UTC

engineer_22 wrote: post #68

roydivision wrote: post #45

This stands to reason. If you need the answer to a question, and you can either get it directly, or spend time researching the answer, you're going to learn much more with the latter approach than the former. You may be disciplined enough to do more research if the answer is directly presented to you, but most people will not do that, and most companies are not interested in that, they want quick 'efficient', 'compet…

We have accounts from the ancient Greeks of the old-school's attitude towards writing. In the deep past, they maintained an oral tradition, and scholars were expected to memorize everything. They saw writing/reading as a crutch that was ruining the youth's memory. We stand now at the edge of a new epoch, reading now being replaced by AI retrieval. There is concern that AI is a crutch, the youth will be weakened. My o…

There is an interesting contrast in the history of the Rabbinic Jewish oral tradition. In that academic environment, the act of memorizing the greatest amount of content was valorized. The super-memorizers, however, were a rung below those who could apply those memorized aphorisms to a different context and generate a new interpretation or ruling. The latter relied on the former to have accurately memorized all the precedents, but got most of the credit, despite having a lower capacity for memorization.

That's probably why the act of shifting from an oral to a written culture was deeply controversial and disruptive, but also somewhat natural. Though the texts we have are written and so they probably make the transition seem more smooth than it was really was. I don't know enough to speak to that.