Not Just Code, But Guidance: What AI Taught Me About Learning

1

October

2025

No ratings yet.

I have classes that require me to use Python and R programming. I expected
countless hours of going through textbooks and tutorials, but I decided to use generative AI
(primarily ChatGPT) to help me learn and improve my programming skills. This learning
process not only helped me with my coding, but I also figured out how to effectively learn
with AI.

At first, I was struggling; I was putting in exercises or vague prompts, and the AI generated
lines of code that I did not understand. I realized that it was not about understanding code
but about understanding how to ask the right questions to get answers tailored to my
needs. I decided to experiment with this, and I treated the AI not like a search engine, but
like an online tutor. The ‘study and learn’ mode on ChatGPT helped a lot. I provided the AI
with a coding task, and it responded with a detailed guide: from organizing to creating the
code and then improving it. The positive aspect was the momentum—I didn’t get stuck.
However, the downside was that if I followed every step blindly, I learned less. What helped
me was changing the AI to “explain-first” mode: I requested the reason behind each step, a
simple example, and a brief self-assessment I could perform before proceeding further
with the coding content I had provided. If I encountered an error, I requested to identify the
cause instead of just asking for the correct solution. That transformed the tutorial from a
solution guide into genuine teaching.

Reflecting on my experience with improving my coding skills with generative AI, I believe
that there are both promises and limits. On the one hand, it offers personalized learning
and support tailored to your needs and at any time, but on the other hand, it promotes
passive learning. I think there needs to be a balance: anyone using generative AI should
experiment with how it can support their work effectively, while still making sure they
remain in control of the process. If I could change anything in these tools, such as the
‘Study and Learn’ ChatGPT, I would make them function more like a teacher: make it ask
questions to assess skill levels, clarify the solutions, and give additional exercises to check
if the content is understood. By using generative AI in that way, for educational purposes, it
does not eliminate the process of learning; in fact, it enhances it.

Please rate this

From Chatbots to CEOs: How Far Can GenAI Go?

18

September

2025

5/5 (3)

When chatbots such as ChatGPT emerged, they were regarded as novelties: entertaining tools for trivia, composing brief texts, or generating ideas. Within just a few years, Generative AI (GenAI) has entered strategic areas — creating legal documents, developing marketing campaigns, predicting trends, and even crafting new products. The focus is changing from what GenAI is capable of to what its limits might be. Might we eventually witness an AI serving as a CEO?

A few companies are currently trying out new methods. In 2022, Chinese tech company NetDragon Websoft gained attention for naming an AI-driven virtual humanoid, “Ms. Tang Yu,” as the CEO of one of its subsidiaries. The organization stated that the AI would enhance operational efficiency and deliver impartial decision-making (Business Insider, 2022). Though mainly symbolic, this action underscores how AI is starting to be placed in roles resembling leadership.

Researchers indicate that AI is subtly reshaping leadership dynamics. A report from Capgemini (2023) states that executives are increasingly depending on GenAI for decision-making assistance, trend analysis, and performance tracking. The issue arises when innovation frequently outpaces governance, resulting in a “responsibility gap” where ethical supervision fails to keep up with technological implementation (NTT DATA, 2025).

There are also dangers to human motivation. A study from Harvard Business Review (2025) discovered that although GenAI enhances short-term productivity, it might diminish intrinsic motivation if employees feel excluded by algorithms. This implies that an “AI supervisor” may enhance workflow efficiency but may have difficulty in inspiring, empathizing, or motivating — traits crucial to human leadership.

What might a CEO powered by AI resemble? In my opinion, it is probable that it won’t be an independent machine “operating” a business but rather a combined system: humans offering vision, ethical guidance, and emotional insight, while AI manages data-focused optimization and quick decision assistance. Ultimately, regardless of the emergence of a formal “AI CEO,” the path is evident: GenAI is infiltrating more complex roles that influence strategy, culture, and innovation. The real challenge will be if leaders can incorporate AI as a collaborator instead of a substitute, guaranteeing that efficiency does not sacrifice accountability, trust, and human relationships.

References

Business Insider. (2022). A Chinese gaming firm appoints AI-powered CEO. Retrieved from https://www.businessinsider.com

Capgemini. (2023). Generative AI in leadership. Retrieved from https://www.capgemini.com

Harvard Business Review. (2025). GenAI makes people more productive — and less motivated. Retrieved from https://hbr.org

NTT DATA. (2025). AI responsibility crisis: Why executive leadership must act now. Retrieved from https://us.nttdata.com

Please rate this