Raw LLM Responses

Given my high school experience, I don't think your top performers were better because they used AI. I think that they were more open to using AI because they were already mostly top performers. Or, more specifically, because they had a key trait needed to *be* a top performer: They sought out outside tools and assistance. I'm old, but I do remember how people were back in high school. Most of my high school classmates formed cliques and only rarely spoke to someone outside of their cliques. And by that, I mean me. I'm borderline autistic, and as a child I didn't communicate well. I wanted to, and I understood that I needed practice to do this. But people found talking to me annoying. To work around that, I talked to everyone, doing my best to leave conversations when they became annoyed with me, before they became very annoyed. What I found from this that's pertinent here is something I've since read of multiple studies that apparently confirmed: the students that do poorly tend to not have education support at home and they don't seek out outside help. The students who do best have support at home, yet still seek outside help beyond that support. The worst students are even averse to any suggestion that someone could help them. "Do you think I'm stupid?" was the most common response I got from students in the bottom 10% of their class by GPA when I asked if they wanted help learning something they'd done very poorly on. I tried multiple responses, including, "If I thought you were stupid, I wouldn't bother trying to help. I know you're not stupid. I know you're better than this. You've helped me in social situations I couldn't navigate on my own." Nothing I tried worked. Only once did I have a study partner from this segment of the class, and it was only because our teacher specifically assigned them to work with me on a project. That turned out great, as he wasn't stupid, he just missed something basic years earlier, without which he couldn't succeed in that class. Without support, there wasn't any way for him to identify that and learn whatever it was. There were, of curse, plenty of students who got help at home, but didn't seek out outside help, and there were students who sought out outside help but didn't get help at home. For the most part, these students made up the peak of the bell curve. There was one student who basically spent every moment they could in the library studying and didn't really get help at home that made it into the bottom of the top performers list, and there were a couple of students who received help at home and also sought out outside help that were still in the bottom 20%. Different people are different, and what helps one person doesn't help everyone. I'm not an education expert and I don't know what all the worst students were missing. Although I do know part of the problem of the students who sought out outside help from a liquor bottle. I'm sure I don't know all of it; that choice came from somewhere, and I don't understand how they came to that point. I still feel confident what caused them to come to that point continued to be an issue, because the one thing I've learned about alcohol is that it might form chemical solutions, but it isn't a solution itself.