What Students Want Teachers to Know
Source: FitzyHistory Substack
Author: FitzyHistory
Original source: https://fitzyhistory.substack.com/p/what-students-want-teachers-to-know
Private backup: the full article text is archived in the private repository at archives/articles/fitzyhistory-substack-com-what-students-want-teachers-to-know.source.md. It is not published on the public Quartz site.
Summary
FitzyHistory reports on conversations with high school students in an AI club about how they and their peers use AI in school. Students describe AI as already embedded in academic and personal workflows: tutoring, quizzes, flashcards, product comparisons, study guides, and research support. Their central message is that prohibition is unrealistic and often counterproductive. They want teachers to create guided, honest spaces where AI use can be discussed, modeled, bounded, and connected to learning rather than driven underground through punitive policy.
Big ideas
- Learning still needs some struggle, even when AI can make things easier
- AI literacy requires different kinds of AI interaction
- Schools should start with learning values before choosing AI tools
- District AI work is a long-term redesign project
Claims
- Punitive AI bans can drive student use underground
- Teen AI use is already normal enough for schools to plan around it
- Students need boundaries for when to use AI and when to step back
- AI can undermine learning when students use it without guidance
- AI literacy takes system capacity, not just tool access
Key evidence and examples
- Students report using AI for interactive math diagrams, quizzes with explanations, flashcards, shuffle modes, and gamified study tools.
- A student describes using AI for product comparisons, asking for citations, and checking which sources matter.
- Students distinguish shortcut use from integrated, efficiency-oriented use.
- Multiple students argue that banning AI is ineffective because students will use it anyway and punishment pushes use underground.
Education relevance
Very high for K–12 AI policy, student voice, teacher professional learning, academic integrity, assignment redesign, and moving from prohibition toward supervised, context-specific AI use.