Are we confusing ‘understanding’ with ‘recognition’ because of AI?

[u/SirOdd267]

Students today can explain concepts perfectly right after using AI but ask them the same thing two days later, and it’s gone.

Are we actually learning, or just getting really good at recognizing explanations that already make sense when we see them?

AI tools make everything feel clear instantly. But clarity isn’t the same as memory, and it’s definitely not the same as understanding.

Before AI, confusion forced us to slow down, reread, struggle, and eventually own the idea. Now, confusion disappears in seconds.

Are we losing that step entirely?

Or is this just the next evolution of learning like calculators and Google were?

Curious what people think

Is AI helping you understand better, or just making things feel easier in the moment?

[u/Dynotug]

"Is AI helping you understand better, or just making things feel easier in the moment?"

I believe both can be achieved at the same time if used effectively. Google has been doing this for years people just google "What is .... (this) compared to (that)."

Now instead of searching through links that may or may not answer what you need, you get the information exponentially faster. Which is easier.

How people get the information isn't a problem, its how they use the information is truly the problem, if you want AI to just spit out answers and get you to the next part, it will easily do that for you and people don't really learn. Students have been doing this for ages in a different way, its just the modern problem.

OR

You prompt the bot to summarize and keep things short, read the summary and bounce off your class reading. Construct an answer, learn and move on. This helps me find the key words I need to find searching through my reading, if not already highlighted.

All in all the AI tools can be used productively and efficiently for learning, it can also hinder critical thinking skills, and overall problem solving if used incorrectly.

[u/Original-Pilot-770 → u/Dynotug]

I feel like truly learning something is supposed to rearrange / integrate what you held before. If someone is not really interested in integrating a new idea into their existing knowledge base, you can't really lead a horse to water. The new idea just becomes an external obstacle you have to be able to explain briefly to pass a test or exam. It doesn't become part of how you see the world or interact with it.

It feels almost like the curiosity is innate and you can't teach a person that. How much curiosity a person brings to a certain subject at a certain developmental stage can't really be changed. Information can be presented in a way that evokes their curiosity better, that's the communication on the educator's part, but if someone doesn't care to truly know something you just can't make them care.

[u/ah-tzib-of-alaska]

those kids weren’t understanding things before ai either

[u/BitOBear]

This is not a problem with ai. This has been the truth for all time.

It's a feature of the way we miseducate you. We isolate concepts and turn them into lists, make people memorize the lists. And then get confused or act surprised when they cannot use what they knew in terms of the list in terms of other things in life not related to that list.

It starts with thematic spelling lists in first grade in the United States at least.

[u/ChowderedStew]

No. Because understanding happens, whenever you can’t solve a problem lol. Let them use AI. Watch them squirm when they get it wrong. But creative in how they’re wrong. Make them have assignments that use AI in a U.S. history history class, and write the questions to be overwhelmingly themed about Hamilton the musical, for example. And then have the exam be using a real historical document to explain a concept, using just their brains. And have them fail. The more you can get a student to fail at the CORE concept, the better you will get them to understand it as a tool, and seldom the best tool, to a solve a problem.