The idea that information and judgment are complements is a particularly useful way to frame this shift.
I'd add that judgment develops through practice, not just exposure to more information. A person can read several excellent explanations and still struggle to recognise when one doesn't fit the situation in front of them.
That's why I find the habit of forming an initial view before asking AI so valuable. It gives us something of our own to compare against the answer, question, and improve.
The real opportunity isn't simply to make information abundant. It's to use that abundance to help people become better at evaluating evidence and making decisions independently.
How do you think we can make that kind of growth visible beyond the classroom?
I like the idea of students as co-creators. Perhaps one way to make lifelong learning visible is to look beyond what students can explain and examine what they can apply, question, and revise independently.
When learners can connect an idea to a new situation—and explain why they changed their thinking—we get a clearer signal that learning is continuing beyond the classroom. Thanks for adding this perspective!
The complements frame settles a question your component 3 quietly raises: why no school ever graded 'seeing what is wrong.' Grading it needs a standing supply of fluent, confident, wrong material to plant in front of students, and producing that by hand was slow, skilled work no examination board could commission at scale - so mass schooling ran a century with the hardest skill off the ledger. Cheap generation just solved the supply problem, so the error-hunt is finally scoreable: seed a packet with plausible wrong answers, count the catches, and weight the false alarms, since someone who challenges every sentence has demonstrated nothing. I trace that selection history, up to the Dell'Acqua result where assisted consultants landed 19 points worse once the fluent answer sat outside the model's competence, in Before the Answer Is Known: https://seldondance.substack.com/p/before-the-answer-is-known #AIEducation #CriticalThinking
The idea that information and judgment are complements is a particularly useful way to frame this shift.
I'd add that judgment develops through practice, not just exposure to more information. A person can read several excellent explanations and still struggle to recognise when one doesn't fit the situation in front of them.
That's why I find the habit of forming an initial view before asking AI so valuable. It gives us something of our own to compare against the answer, question, and improve.
The real opportunity isn't simply to make information abundant. It's to use that abundance to help people become better at evaluating evidence and making decisions independently.
How do you think we can make that kind of growth visible beyond the classroom?
That’s a great question. How to ensure life-long learning happens. The classroom builds the foundation for sure, but students are also co-creators.
I like the idea of students as co-creators. Perhaps one way to make lifelong learning visible is to look beyond what students can explain and examine what they can apply, question, and revise independently.
When learners can connect an idea to a new situation—and explain why they changed their thinking—we get a clearer signal that learning is continuing beyond the classroom. Thanks for adding this perspective!
The complements frame settles a question your component 3 quietly raises: why no school ever graded 'seeing what is wrong.' Grading it needs a standing supply of fluent, confident, wrong material to plant in front of students, and producing that by hand was slow, skilled work no examination board could commission at scale - so mass schooling ran a century with the hardest skill off the ledger. Cheap generation just solved the supply problem, so the error-hunt is finally scoreable: seed a packet with plausible wrong answers, count the catches, and weight the false alarms, since someone who challenges every sentence has demonstrated nothing. I trace that selection history, up to the Dell'Acqua result where assisted consultants landed 19 points worse once the fluent answer sat outside the model's competence, in Before the Answer Is Known: https://seldondance.substack.com/p/before-the-answer-is-known #AIEducation #CriticalThinking
Thanks for stopping by and sharing this. I am just getting to it now.