Raw LLM Responses

I'm not opposed to AI or to AI in education. My concern is timing and foundations. Introducing a "calculator" before teaching core skills undermines critical thinking and healthy human interaction. You wouldn't hand an elementary student a calculator before they understand numbers, operations, and how answers are derived. Once those basics are secure, tools can accelerate learning; they shouldn't replace it. Teachers must guide inputs and evaluate outputs in real time. AI cannot and should not replace that role. Giving developing students tools that think for them risks technically correct answers without the reasoning or social skills behind them. Human interaction is foundational. At the high school and university levels, AI should be treated as what it is: a tool to support study and problem-solving, not a substitute for educators who diagnose misunderstandings and cultivate critical thought. Replacing teachers with AI risks crippling a generation. AI will only become faster and more embedded in daily life. That progress has benefits, but it also carries costs. We should keep both in view and avoid being dazzled solely by the shiny, cool features. I also agree with what Conrad Hughes said about what are teachers assessing in their exams/tests and the 19th century knowledge regurgitation. People have been screaming this for decades to stop this type of teaching for teaching for the test rather than teaching for lifelong learning.