From a young age, technology has been my playground for creation and discovery. My first encounter with OpenAI’s ChatGPT was through TikTok, and despite initial skepticism, its capabilities quickly won me over. I integrated ChatGPT into my daily routine, and by my final semester at the University of Minnesota, I developed a systematic approach to slash my study time by at least 50% per exam.
The University’s commitment to accessible learning meant course materials were readily available online. I leveraged this by feeding lecture transcripts, slides, and study guides into ChatGPT, specifically using a custom GPT designed for creating Remnote flashcards. This tool transformed the raw data into structured text that RemNote, my preferred note-taking app, interpreted as flashcards. Having honed my prompt engineering skills with ChatGPT, I could efficiently extract key information. While the AI’s output wasn’t always perfect initially, the time saved compared to traditional study methods was substantial. These AI-generated flashcards, delivered via spaced repetition, minimized the time needed for memorization. This process streamlined the “learning” aspect by automating much of the groundwork.
However, as I became increasingly reliant on flashcards for academic success, the quality of my learning began to suffer, and my passion for learning waned. I started to question if my lifelong love for education was fading. After reflection, I realized my enjoyment of learning was still present; the issue was that academic achievement, as defined by grades, wasn’t aligned with the skill development that educational institutions ideally value. Ironically, I found more fulfillment in designing the AI-driven study process than in mastering the subjects themselves.
This experience isn’t intended to advocate for limiting access to course resources or making them less AI-friendly, nor is it a critique of potential shortcomings within the education system. Instead, it underscores a fundamental flaw in the validity of global grading systems. As Michael Hanegan astutely points out, AI amplifies these inherent issues. Many grading systems inadvertently reward students who excel at “playing the school game,” rather than those who are truly effective learners.
My AI-assisted study method, while academically sound and reflected positively in my GPA, didn’t translate to genuine, deep learning. Grades often assess rote memorization or the ability to follow instructions, rather than critical thinking in real-world, ambiguous situations. This is why many believe that true learning occurs outside the confines of formal education. The crucial question is how we should approach learning in an era of rapidly evolving technology. If you share similar thoughts, disagree, or have insights on this topic, your comments and perspectives are welcome.
