It's like using a faulty calculator, but with even less mental investment.

Shows people using the LLM thought less about it and probably learned less.

Sometimes students are motivated to learn, but there's always the temptation to just get the work done and relax...

This is interesting to me as I like to say the llms are basically another abstraction of search. Initially it was links with no real weight that had to be gone through and then various algorithms weighted the return, then the results started giving a small blurb so one did not have to follow every link, and now your basically getting a report which should have references to the sources. I would like to see this looking at how folks engage with an llm. Basically my guess is if one treats the llm as a helper and collaborates to create the product that they will remember more than if they treat it as a servant and just instructs them to do it and takes the output as is.

I bet this is just correlation. Frequent reliance on AI ( and not just using it as a tool for a specific reason)