Dear Friends,
My father bought a second-hand kid’s cycle during my 6th standard after a lot of persuasion. This cycle was almost in a non-operational condition. We had to repair it and make it run. However, the joy of riding it was uncountable. When I was in 8th standard, again after a lot of negotiation, I inherited my father’s Atlas cycle (1964 model), which I used till my post-graduation. After working for two years, I bought my first second-hand two-wheeler, which I used for another two years before it was abandoned. The initial struggle to get that second-hand bicycle left a deep impression on my mind — so much so that I abandoned my first Maruti 800 (non-AC and non-metallic version) only after 15 years, when it couldn’t move an inch.
What’s the point I’m trying to make? There’s a new issue cropping up in education — called “Metacognitive Laziness.”
An experimental study found that learners using ChatGPT performed better in essay score improvement but did not significantly improve in knowledge gain, transfer, or application. Another experiment showed that when a student struggles through Google searches to find results, their application knowledge tends to be higher compared to when they use ChatGPT and get quick answers.
Recently, I came across a story that perfectly connects to this idea of Metacognitive Laziness.
A student once asked his teacher, “I have read so many books but remember very little. What is the use of reading then?”The teacher didn’t answer. A few days later, he gave the student an old, dirty strainer and said, “Bring me some water from the river.” A strainer is a wire-mesh kitchen filter used to separate liquids from fine solids.
The student tried many times, but the water kept slipping through the holes. Tired and upset, he said, “It’s useless. I couldn’t bring any water.”
The teacher smiled and said, “Look at the strainer.” It was now clean and shining.
“That’s what reading does,” said the teacher. “Even if you don’t remember everything, it still cleans your mind and fills it with new thoughts.”
The point I’m trying to make is that while using GenAI is important for productivity in the working world, we shouldn’t outsource our brain work—especially for students below 20 years of age—to AI. Metacognitive laziness kills our natural application knowledge and makes us handicapped in thinking.
Recently, I experimented with this in one of my classes. When I asked students to do an assignment and allowed GPT usage, many completed it with ease, but the responses were not unique — they were uniform and perfect. Assignments, especially case analyses, should involve creativity and originality.
However, after a few days, I conducted another in-class test with the same set of students using a similar case, but this time in a closed environment without GPT access. I asked them to make their own assumptions and apply their natural understanding of the problem, life experiences, and logic to respond. They had full freedom in defining assumptions and justifying their responses.
Interestingly, in this social experiment, we found that over 35% gave unusual and intuitive responses, and 10% outperformed with their natural analytical flow. About 50% struggled to respond perfectly, but they experienced the struggle of a butterfly emerging from its chrysalis.
If we repeat this model with those 50% a few more times, I’m confident their responses will align with the original goal of case analysis.
Future education is all about StoEduTain — (Storytelling + Education + Entertainment). If that purpose is missed, the educational train is derailed. https://www.linkedin.com/company/stodutain/about/
– Ravi Saripalle
