Well said and written! Your bad teachers would be proud. The theme in the comments seems to be "X is simple, therefore rote practice isn't valuable." But that

Well said and written! Your bad teachers would be proud. The theme in the comments seems to be "X is simple, therefore rote practice isn't valuable." But that glosses over the fact that fully understanding and being proficient at X is often a prerequisite for learning X'. Or in other words, calculators can do arithmetic. If we skip mastery of that, how do we propose to teach children differential equations? What is probably more important is the grading-side of ML: by leveraging more ML to auto-note and -score the mechanics of assignments, we free up teacher time to focus on interpreting and suggesting improvements for students, which many teachers are currently too overwhelmed to do.