I didn't smoke a lot of weed in High School, though in my 20s I probably went through several acre's worth.
The very first time I ever smoked pot, though, was during a lunch break in my sophomore year and I can tell you unequivocally, it did not, nor would it ever, have made me a better student - it certainly didn't help me in history class that afternoon. You cannot focus on learning while you're stoned and your short term memory can't retain anything long enough to recall it ten minutes later, much less pass a test the next day. The very notion is ludicrous.
Nicotine, on the other hand, is a mild stimulant, and brings the mind to a sharper focus. I don't know that it would
improve your performance as a student, but it couldn't possibly cause you to do any worse than you would stoned.
That's not to recommend or condemn either, but the very idea that stoners are better students than cigarette smokers (and how many do
both? - I did) is absolutely, patently ridiculous. I have to question the scientific credibility and/or the motives of anyone who makes such an outrageously fallacious statement.
"Researchers from the University of Toronto’s Dalla Lana School of Public Health analyzed data from a survey administered to nearly 39,000 Ontario students between 1981 and 2011. The Centre for Addiction and Mental Health asked students in Grades 7, 9 and 11 about their tobacco and marijuana use, and their academic performance."