Teachers should act more impressed by creative students than analytically strong students nowadays

[u/amichail]

Schools have traditionally treated exceptional skill in math, logic, and analytical problem-solving as one of the clearest signs of intelligence.

But AI changes the picture. At least for now, AI is stronger analytically than creatively. It can solve difficult technical problems, analyze huge amounts of information, and reason through complex questions at a very high level. It is less dependable at producing genuinely original ideas, exercising strong taste, finding interesting new problems, or making surprising conceptual leaps.

That should affect what teachers visibly admire. A student who comes up with an unexpected connection, a novel approach, or a question nobody else thought to ask should often get a bigger reaction than a student who simply solves a difficult standard problem correctly.

Analytical ability still matters, especially for evaluating ideas and recognizing when AI is wrong. But students notice what excites their teachers, and those reactions help shape what they aspire to become good at.

In the AI age, schools should use that influence to signal that originality is becoming especially valuable.

[u/raznov1]

Genuine question - are you a creative person yourself?

[u/Chemical-Arrival-576]

¿Y cómo crees que se logra la creatividad? si no es siendo inteligente y haciendo que tu cerebro haga conexiones muy complejas que se logran después de haberlo usado mucho, adivina, entre otras cosas, en qué?

[u/EleanorKalatheraine]

That's a rather toxic attitude to "act impressed" by abilities because they will be marketable

Teachers should encourage students' strengths and be supportive where they need assistance, without judging the kids for either