A senior architect told me she'd stopped approving AI-generated PRs from her juniors. Her VP noticed. Approval rates dropped. Cycle times spiked. Suddenly, she's the bottleneck. So she invited the VP to a code review. Just to observe. The junior explained the PR. Confident. Articulate. Code executed. Tests passed. Then she asked, "What happens if we add a second payment provider next quarter?" Silence. The junior stared at the code. The model that generated it doesn't know the roadmap. The code didn't contain an answer, because the system design didn't exist beyond the current ticket. In 8 months, the juniors shipped 40,000 lines of code. None of them could explain how the system worked outside of their immediate task. They thought they understood the codebase. They never actually read it. "They're not bad engineers," she said. "But they've never been wrong long enough to learn anything." The VP had offered courses, certifications, book clubs. But the architect needed something else, and it wasn't more training. She needed permission to slow things down, so the juniors could build a real mental model. One that lives outside the chat window. Juniors don't develop judgment from getting things right. They develop it by sitting with wrong answers, long enough to understand why they failed. You want to test their understanding? Ask them to diagram the system. No IDE/docs/ AI. If the diagram has gaps, those gaps exist in their heads too. You won't notice, until something actually breaks.