| ▲ | foresterre an hour ago | ||||||||||||||||
This sounds like it would come at the cost of the honest students who don't want to use LLM's and train their own understanding. Reviewing is just not the same as working through a problem yourself. You often can take shortcuts when checking answers for correctness, which generation (with mind or LLM) of the solution can't take. This isn't limited to Math but equally true for programming and many other skills. | |||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | fartfeatures an hour ago | parent [-] | ||||||||||||||||
I'd push back slightly on this: I spend more of my time reading / reviewing code than writing it yet I still find reading / reviewing code much more mentally demanding. I don't think I'm alone in that. The people that do their own work would be at a huge advantage as the LLM(s) can work as reviewers instead of doing the work so there is more chance of catching a mistake before you lose 20%. On top of that there will be some issues where the LLM is just plain wrong. Being able to work out when that is the case is a hugely useful skill in 2026. It is also something the people who blindly feed their work into an LLM and print its answer without reading it will be unable to discover. Much to their own detriment. | |||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||