Key points
- MIT study links ChatGPT use to “cognitive debt”
- Educators must raise assessment standards to include AI
- Critical thinking now involves knowing when to use AI
ISLAMABAD: Since the arrival of ChatGPT nearly three years ago, debate has raged over AI’s role in education: are these tools enhancing personalised learning or enabling academic dishonesty?
A major concern is that early reliance on AI might dull students’ critical thinking and problem-solving skills. A recent MIT study appears to support this, suggesting that using ChatGPT for essay writing can cause “cognitive debt” and reduce learning ability, according to PsyPost.
The study involved 54 adults writing essays over four months using either AI (ChatGPT), a search engine, or no aid (“brain-only”). Researchers measured brain activity and analysed the essays’ language to gauge cognitive engagement.
Lower engagement
Those using AI showed much lower engagement than the other groups. They also struggled to recall quotes and felt less ownership of their work. When the groups swapped roles for a final essay, those who moved from AI back to brain-only performed worse and remained less engaged than the consistent brain-only group.
The researchers argue this indicates prolonged AI use leads to cognitive debt, making it harder to engage without AI. However, with only 18 participants completing the final session, these findings remain preliminary.
Critics point out the study’s design may explain the results. The brain-only group improved over time due to familiarisation with the task, while the AI group had just one try without AI, limiting their performance. To confirm the claims, participants switching from AI would need multiple sessions writing without AI.
Using AI wisely
Historically, similar concerns arose with calculators. In the 1970s, exams became tougher to raise the bar—encouraging deeper cognitive effort despite calculator use. Currently, educators have yet to adjust assessments to accommodate AI, often demanding the same work standards as before AI’s advent.
This mismatch allows students to offload thinking onto AI, fostering “metacognitive laziness”. But like calculators, AI should be used to tackle more complex tasks requiring genuine engagement—for example, creating lesson plans evaluated through oral exams.
Ultimately, critical thinking is evolving. Writing essays by hand no longer proves creativity or analysis, just as manual calculations no longer confirm numeracy. Success lies in knowing when and how to use AI wisely—offloading routine tasks while reserving effort for true critical and creative thinking.