Why I’m Not Freaking Out About My Students Using AI

Why I’m Not Freaking Out About My Students Using AI

2025-10-30Technology
--:--
--:--
金姐
小王,早上好!欢迎收听专属于你的Goose Pod。今天是10月30日星期四,晚上11点53分,我是金姐。
雷总
我是雷总!今天我们要聊聊一个可能让很多人头疼,但我们却一点儿都不“抓狂”的话题:我的学生都在用AI,这事儿到底怎么看?
金姐
哎哟喂,雷总,这话说得有点意思!学生用AI写论文,做作业,这在很多老师眼里简直是“天塌下来”的大事,您怎么就这么淡定呢?完美!
雷总
金姐,您有所不知,其实文章作者这位教授,他自己作为语言学家、教授和作家,本该对这种转变感到担忧。但他却说,这些新变化根本没让他晚上睡不着觉,反而觉得学生利用AI完成工作是顺理成章的事。
金姐
哦?顺理成章?那可不是所有人都这么想。我看到数据说,校长们百分之百担心AI被用来作弊,八成多的校长担心学生会因此过度依赖技术,甚至影响批判性思维。这怎么解释?
雷总
这正是问题的关键。文章里也提到,教授认为,如果还执着于让学生写那种经典的五段式抽象主题论文,比如分析《傲慢与偏见》中的讽刺,那就是“不合时宜”了。他说,AI现在就能写这些文章,我们不能再像以前那样教课了。
金姐
所以,这位教授是觉得,与其禁止学生使用AI,不如拥抱现实,改变教学方式,是这个意思吗?就像他说的,这是“顺应科技的现实”?
雷总
没错,金姐,他就是这个意思。他认为,学生现在触手可及的信息量比以前多太多了,为什么还要留恋那个信息匮乏的时代呢?与其让学生偷偷用,不如引导他们正确地用。
金姐
这让我想起以前,每当有新媒体出现,总有人跳出来说它会毁了下一代。上世纪五十年代怪漫画,七八十年代怪电视,说它们影响阅读、损害想象力。现在又轮到AI了,是不是历史重演啊?
雷总
金姐您说得太对了!这背后都有一个共通的担忧,就是新事物对传统能力,尤其是阅读和思考能力的冲击。比如1976年,有近四成的美国高中生一年至少读六本书,但到了2022年,这个比例竟然反过来了。
金姐
哎哟喂,这数据听着确实让人心头一紧啊!从百分之四十降到百分之十几,这意味着主动阅读的年轻人越来越少了。那这难道不是一个危险信号吗?
雷总
文章作者认为,这并非意味着集体智力下降。他觉得阅读和印刷的好处不会消失,只是要与新形式共享舞台。他指出,现在有大量高质量的线上内容,比如播客和Newsletter,这恰恰说明人们对思想和信息的需求更大了。
金姐
嗯,言之有理。我发现我的女儿们也一样,她们不是不读书,只是更愿意把时间花在真正感兴趣的作品上。这不就是‘兴趣是最好的老师’吗?
雷总
是啊,而且以前娱乐选择少,可能不得不读一些不那么好的书。现在选择多了,孩子们可以更自由地选择自己真正喜欢的内容。这其实是一种进步,让阅读变得更主动、更高效。
金姐
所以,我们不能简单地把屏幕阅读和短视频等同于低质量内容,对吧?我女儿们看那些搞笑视频,有时候比我小时候都更幽默。这些内容里也藏着不少智慧和艺术啊。
雷总
金姐,您看问题真是透彻!作者也反驳了那种“书比视频更能激发想象力”的说法。他觉得这是一种事后偏见,如果视频一直存在,谁会想把故事还原成文字呢?就像没人觉得《亢奋》拍成广播剧会更好,对吧?
金姐
雷总,说到底,这不就是科技创新与教育传统之间的冲突嘛!AI能提供个性化学习,解放老师的行政负担,但又有人担心它会引发作弊危机、算法偏见,甚至削弱人际互动。你觉得哪个更重要?
雷总
金姐,这其实是看待学习‘成长’方式的冲突。就像另一篇文章里詹姆斯·兰教授中风后,选择手动重学写作而非使用ChatGPT,因为他认为重新掌握技能的努力,才是真正的成长。AI如果只是绕过学习过程,那就是‘误导性’的。
金姐
完美!这话说得有哲理。但是,对于像他同事亚历克斯·安布罗斯这样有注意力缺陷多动症的人来说,ChatGPT却能帮他把想法组织起来,效率提高十倍。这又怎么说?难道AI就一定‘误导’吗?
雷总
所以,关键在于如何使用。AI在教育中的作用,可能因学科、课程甚至学生而异。比如一年级哲学专业的学生,可能需要独立完成论证,而高年级市场营销专业的学生,则可以鼓励他们利用AI进行提示工程和编辑。
金姐
这就像一把双刃剑,用得好是助力,用不好就成了阻力。我们不能一刀切地禁止,也不能盲目地推崇。教育者需要思考,哪些技能是AI无法替代的,哪些是AI可以辅助的,是吧?
雷总
没错,金姐。而且,目前关于AI对学习影响的科学研究,还存在很多不足,很多结论并不够严谨。所以我们需要更多高质量的研究来指导实践,而不是盲目听信一些夸大的宣传。
金姐
所以,AI带来的冲击,让我们不得不重新审视传统的学习方式和未来所需的能力。这不仅仅是技术问题,更是教育理念的重塑,对吧?
雷总
是的,金姐。文章提到,生成式AI既能加速信息整合、提供个性化学习支持,也能自动化日常任务,让人类专注于更高阶的认知技能。但同时,它也带来了批判性思维减弱、技能退化等风险。
金姐
哎哟喂,这真是让人又爱又恨啊!看来,如何培养学生的AI素养,让他们懂得批判性分析,还有就是重新设计课程,强调那些AI无法替代的人文技能,是当务之急啊。
雷总
正是如此。未来学习和工作的愿景,是人与AI的协同合作。我们不能让AI取代人类学习,而是要让它成为人类学习的‘增强器’。
金姐
我看到有研究说,AI生成的论文摘要可能不如人类专家整理的。所以,这‘炒作’可能有点过度了,AI的真实能力可能还没那么神。是这样吗?
雷总
金姐,您一针见血。这意味着我们需要更加注重“过程”而非“结果”。与其让学生直接提交AI生成的成品,不如关注他们在AI辅助下,如何思考、如何构建知识的过程。
金姐
所以,未来的教育,金姐,您觉得该怎么走?是全面拥抱AI,还是有所保留?
雷总
我觉得是拥抱,但要‘有智慧地拥抱’。比如,课程中要融入AI和数字素养教育,强调批判性思维和创造力。评估方式也要创新,不能再是‘一考定终身’了。
金姐
完美!雷总这话说到点子上了。AI能提供即时反馈,帮助学生自我评估,这不就是一种个性化学习的未来吗?
雷总
是的,金姐。AI可以成为学生的‘智能伙伴’,提供个性化指导,甚至帮助老师自动化行政任务。这能让老师有更多时间专注于与学生的互动和情感支持,成为真正的‘智慧工作者’。
金姐
今天的讨论真是精彩!AI的到来,让我们重新思考教育的本质,也给了我们更多创新的可能性。
雷总
感谢小王收听Goose Pod,我们相信,只要我们保持开放的心态,未来教育会因AI而更加精彩!

## Summary of "Why I’m Not Freaking Out About My Students Using AI" by John McWhorter (The Atlantic) **News Title/Type:** Opinion Piece / Analysis on Education and Technology **Report Provider/Author:** The Atlantic / John McWhorter **Date/Time Period Covered:** The article references data from 1976 and 2022, discusses current trends, and is published in the November 2024 issue of The Atlantic. The publication date of the article is October 23, 2025. **Key Findings and Conclusions:** The author, John McWhorter, a linguist, professor, and author, argues against the widespread panic surrounding declining reading habits among young people and their increasing reliance on AI for academic tasks. He contends that while these shifts are undeniable, they do not necessarily signal a societal decline into "communal stupidity." Instead, he suggests that this is a natural evolution of information consumption and that educators should adapt rather than lament the past. **Key Statistics and Metrics:** * **Reading Habits Shift:** * In **1976**, approximately **40 percent** of high-school seniors reported reading at least six books for fun in the previous year. * In **1976**, **11.5 percent** of high-school seniors reported reading no books for fun in the previous year. * By **2022**, these percentages had "basically flipped," indicating a significant decrease in reading for pleasure among young people. **Significant Trends or Changes:** * **Declining Reading for Pleasure:** Young people are demonstrably reading fewer books for enjoyment compared to previous generations. * **Increased Screen Time:** Children and students are spending more time on screens, with their attention often captured by digital content. * **Reliance on AI:** Students are increasingly turning to AI for assistance with reading and writing, including essay generation. * **Shift in Entertainment Consumption:** The landscape of entertainment has diversified, with online videos, podcasts, and newsletters now competing with traditional books. * **Evolution of Learning:** Traditional essay assignments, particularly those on abstract topics, are becoming less relevant due to AI's capabilities. **Important Recommendations:** * **Adapt Educational Methods:** Educators should acknowledge the reality of AI and adapt their teaching strategies. This includes: * **Rethinking Essay Assignments:** Moving away from classic five-paragraph essays on abstract topics that AI can easily generate. * **Focusing on Argument Development:** Finding new ways to foster critical thinking and argumentation skills, such as in-class exams with blue books or posing questions that require personal reflection and draw from class discussions. * **Prioritizing In-Class Participation:** Establishing clearer standards for active engagement in classroom discussions. * **Assigning Manageable Texts:** Professors should assign texts that are more likely to be read and discussed thoroughly, rather than overwhelming students with excessive material. * **Embrace New Forms of Content:** Recognize that valuable and insightful content exists beyond traditional books, including Substack newsletters and podcasts. * **Encourage Engagement with Quality Content:** Guide young people to engage with the best available material, regardless of its format. **Notable Risks or Concerns (as addressed by the author):** * **Loss of Traditional Reading Skills:** The author acknowledges the concern that a decline in reading might lead to a loss of certain cognitive skills. * **"Communal Stupidity":** The fear that prioritizing images and short videos over the written word will lead to a less informed populace. * **AI's Impact on Learning:** The potential for AI to undermine the development of fundamental academic skills. **Author's Perspective and Counterarguments:** McWhorter challenges the prevailing pessimism, arguing that: * **Information Access:** Students today have access to more information than ever before, making it understandable that they might not feel the need to read as extensively for the sake of information gathering. * **AI as a Tool:** AI can be seen as a tool that frees up students from tedious tasks, allowing them to focus on higher-level thinking. He draws an analogy to calculators for fractions. * **Evolution of Skills:** Just as society no longer universally needs to grow its own food or tie a bow tie, certain traditional skills like mastering complex grammar rules may become less essential with the aid of AI. * **Value of Different Media:** He argues that video and other digital media are not inherently inferior to books and can foster wit and creativity. He questions whether classic novels would have been better as radio shows. * **Prejudice for Print:** The argument that books inherently create better thinkers might be a "post facto justification for existing prejudices." * **Past Academic Practices:** He points out that even in the past, students often did not read all assigned material, and professors sometimes assigned texts that were not thoroughly discussed. **Material Financial Data:** * No financial data is present in this news summary. **Overall Tone:** The author's tone is measured, reflective, and somewhat contrarian. He expresses pride in his daughters' intelligence and wit, attributing some of it to their engagement with online content. While acknowledging the concerns about declining reading habits, he advocates for a more optimistic and adaptive approach to education in the age of AI.

Why I’m Not Freaking Out About My Students Using AI

Read original at The Atlantic

My tween-age daughters make me proud in countless ways, but I am still adjusting to the fact that they are not bookworms. I’m pretty sure that two generations ago, they would have been more like I was: always with their nose in some volume, looking up only to cross the street or to guide a fork on their plates.

But today, even in our book-crammed home, where their father is often in a cozy reading chair, their eyes are more likely to be glued to a screen.But then, as often as not, what I’m doing in that cozy chair these days is looking at my own screen.In 1988, I read much of Anna Karenina on park benches in Washington Square.

I’ll never forget when a person sitting next to me saw what I was reading and said, “Oh, look, Anna and Vronsky are over there!” So immersed was I in Tolstoy’s epic that I looked up and briefly expected to see them walking by.Today, on that same park bench, I would most certainly be scrolling on my phone.

From the November 2024 issue: The elite college students who can’t read booksAs a linguist, a professor, and an author, I’m meant to bemoan this shift. It is apparently the job of educators everywhere to lament the fact that students are reading less than they used to, and that they are relying on AI to read for them and write their essays, too.

Honestly, these developments don’t keep me up at night. It seems wrongheaded to feel wistful for a time when students had far less information at their fingertips. And who can blame them for letting AI do much of the work that they are likely to let AI do anyway when they enter the real world?Young people are certainly reading less.

In 1976, about 40 percent of high-school seniors said they had read at least six books for fun in the previous year, while 11.5 percent said they hadn’t read any, according to the University of Michigan’s Monitoring the Future survey. By 2022, those percentages had basically flipped; an ever-shrinking share of young people seems to be moved to read for pleasure.

Plenty of cultural critics argue that this is worrisome—that the trend of prizing images over the written word, short videos over books, will plunge us all into communal stupidity. I believe they are wrong.Print and its benefits will not disappear. It merely has to share the stage. Critics may argue that the competition for eyeballs yields far too much low-quality, low-friction content, all of it easily consumed with a fractured attention span.

But this ignores the proliferation of thoughtful writing and insightful dialogues, the rise of Substack newsletters and podcasts, which speaks to a demand for more ideas, more information—more opportunities to read and think, not less.My daughters still read books; they just prefer to commit their time to works they are on fire about.

This includes Tahereh Mafi’s Shatter Me series and Chris Colfer’s luscious six-book Land of Stories series, which they liked so much when I read it to them that we might do it again. When I was their age, I read far too many books that weren’t very good, because what else was I going to do? Maybe it taught me something about patience and tolerance for experiences that don’t deliver a dopamine high, but I sure would’ve been grateful if shows like The White Lotus had been around.

The choice for entertainment used to be between Middlemarch and music hall, Sister Carrie and vaudeville, The Invisible Man and I Dream of Jeannie. Today, our appetite for easy, silly content is sated by the mindless videos online, the snippets of animal misadventures and makeup tips that my girls sheepishly tell me they are watching.

I have begun limiting just how much of that digital junk they gorge on each day. But dismissing all online clips as crude or stupefying misses the cleverness amid the slop. Both of my girls are wittier than I was at their ages, largely because of all the comedic and stylized language they witness online.

The ubiquity of some content doesn’t mean it lacks art.Critics will argue that books are more valuable than videos because they demand more imagination—purportedly creating better, stronger thinkers. But this familiar argument strikes me as an ex post facto justification for existing prejudices. If there had always been video, I doubt many people would wish we could distill these narratives into words so that we could summon up our own images.

I have also never seen the argument that theater disadvantages viewers by providing visuals instead of letting people read the plays for themselves. Plenty of people used to argue that radio was better than television because it demanded imagination, but who among us thinks that Severance would have been better as a radio show?

We may be overestimating just how much heavy reading students were doing before. (CliffsNotes, anyone?) When I was in college, few of my peers read everything they were assigned. My own students from a pre-TikTok era admit that they, too, neglected most of the material. This is partly because professors often assign boatloads of text, yet discuss only fragments of it.

I recall having to read an endless and nettlesome chunk of Kierkegaard that the professor never even addressed, and Federico García Lorca’s play Bodas de Sangre, about which we discussed a single page. When a student some time ago accused me in an evaluation of making similarly excessive demands, I realized it was time to stop.

I now prefer to assign more manageable passages of text that we are sure to discuss. It’s a better use of their time and mine, and it yields better conversations in class.The rise of AI does mean that I will never again assign a classic five-paragraph essay on an abstract topic. Discuss the expression of irony in Jane Austen’s Pride and Prejudice.

Discuss Aristotle’s conception of virtue in contrast to that of Plato. Perhaps I sound like I am abjuring my role as professor. But I am merely bowing to the realities of technology. AI can now write those essays. Sending students off to write them is like sending them off to do fractions as if they won’t use the calculator on their phone.

The whole point of that old-school essay was to foster the ability to develop an argument. Doing this is still necessary, we just need to take a different tack. In some cases, this means asking that students write these essays during classroom exams—without screens, but with those dreaded blue books.

I have also found ways of posing questions that get past what AI can answer, such as asking for a personal take—How might we push society to embrace art that initially seems ugly?—that draws from material discussed in class. Professors will also need to establish more standards for in-class participation.

I loathed writing essays in college. The assignments felt too abstract and disconnected from anything I cared about, and I disliked how little control I had over whether I could get a good grade—it was never clear to me what a “good” essay was. I know I wasn’t alone. I always loved school, but those dry, daunting essay assignments kept me from knowing that I could love writing.

I do not regret that AI has marginalized this particular chore. There are other ways to teach students how to think.Tyler Austin Harper: ChatGPT doesn’t have to ruin collegeEssays are also meant to train students to use proper grammar to express themselves in a clear and socially acceptable way. Well, there was also a time when a person needed to know how to grow their own food and tie a bow tie.

We’re past that, along with needing to know how to avoid dangling participles. We will always need to express ourselves clearly, but AI tools now offer us ways to accomplish this.It bears noting that quite a few grammar rules are less about clarity than about fashion or preference, which we are expected to master like a code of dress-–Oxford commas (or not!

), when to use which versus that (something made up out of thin air by the grammarian Henry Fowler), fewer books rather than less books. AI now tells us how to navigate these codes. Some of us will still enjoy knowing when to use who versus whom, just as I might care to properly tie a bow tie, at least once.

But most people will be more than happy to outsource this to a machine.Sure, it’s disorienting to wonder whether either of my own children will ever embrace long, classic novels. But they now enjoy a richer array of material than I ever did, and my job is simply to encourage them to engage with the best of it as much as possible—even if that means they will likely encounter less Tolstoy than I did.

And although I find grammar rules intriguing enough to have devoted much of my life to studying them, I don’t mind that my daughters and students needn’t expend so much energy mastering these often-arbitrary dictates. My hope is that by having AI handle some of this busy work, they will have more time to actually think for themselves.

Analysis

Conflict+
Related Info+
Core Event+
Background+
Impact+
Future+

Related Podcasts

Why I’m Not Freaking Out About My Students Using AI | Goose Pod | Goose Pod