"I just did exactly what I've been warning teachers about. A colleague sent me a seven-page research paper on AI and assessment. Just the thought of reading it felt uncomfortable. Maybe it was the time of day, or maybe a sign of my own dependency, but almost instinctively, I opened Claude and asked for a summary. The AI praised the paper's approach. It commended how AI could remove the "onerous" burden of grading from teachers, making assessment more efficient and adaptive."
"I started incorporating that summary into an article I was writing. Then, I glanced at the actual paper to double check on phrasing that seemed off. I saw the word "onerous" on page one and began reading the first page. Then, I forced myself to read all seven pages. An hour later, I'd reached the opposite conclusion of Claude. The paper treated meaningful assessment as a problem to be solved through efficiency."
Adults and students often avoid productive confusion by outsourcing comprehension to AI, creating a reflex that bypasses personal thinking. Instant AI summaries tend to average perspectives and emphasize efficiency, which can obscure the relational and cognitive value embedded in tasks like assessment. Direct engagement with primary material can reveal different conclusions that value the cognitive load of evaluative work. When devices are removed and iteration is required, learners can solve problems quickly, demonstrating that confusion tolerance emerges through deliberate practice. Confusion tolerance develops only when struggle is non-optional, so educational design should preserve productive difficulty.
Read at Psychology Today
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]