Is AI in Classrooms Killing Critical Thinking? | Image Source: www.chronicle.com
BONDI, Australia, April 3, 2025 – A silent revolution is taking place in classes around the world. But unlike student-led seats or slate battles on ​the curricula that once ​triggered the educational ​debate, this uprising ​is one of code, circuits and ​convenience. Artificial Intelligence (AI) has entered course plans, classification systems and even student assignments, and not all are encouraging. As educators, parents and technologists discuss their merits, an urgent question arises: Do we feed the next generation of thinkers or simply train fast engineers?
The debate on ​AI: Does convenience cost us character?
Artificial intelligence tools such as ChatGPT, OpenAI GPT-4 and similar language models have undoubtedly changed the ​way ​education is delivered. ​Advocates, such as Charlotte Dungan of the AI Education ​Project, ​argue that AI can “excite and train students everywhere with ​AI literacy.” Speaking with Harvard’s ED magazine, Dungan celebrated AI’s potential to eliminate “hard work” in classrooms, allowing students to participate in deeper ​learning experiences. But this premise requires an ​uncomfortable question: What exactly does he call rotten work?
In the traditional ​sense, bad learning refers to the memorization of facts without understanding. However, many educators argue that what is ​considered “broken” – ​activities such ​as searching ​for various ​sources, interpreting texts, writing arguments and editing essays – are in fact cornerstones of critical thinking. Eliminating these ​tasks from the learning process can deprive ​students of the skills they need to get involved in the world. As Joseph R. Murray, West Tennessee professor and ​civil rights lawyer at The Hill wrote: “If we continue to ​provide ​our students with excuses and shortcuts, their skills will be as artificial as the intelligence ​they use to ​get them. »
Do we replace discipline with distraction?
Critics of high-tech classes often cite increasing apathy among students and a decrease in academic rigour. The dissemination of standards-based classifications, ​where participation ​exceeds performance, has changed the direction ​of results to effort, often ​by diluting the value of excellence. Add IA to this ​already malleable system, and we can standardize shortcuts under the pretext of innovation.
From a practical point of view, AI offers students tools for the learning process. Why ​read Augustine when an AI model ​can summarize it? ​Why ​analyze a poem when ChatGPT can produce a 500-word essay in seconds? These tools can be tempting, especially in an educational culture ​where ends often justify ​the media. But should we be surprised that students follow the easiest path when their institutions – and, by extension, society – point out that travel is no longer important?
Teaching ​without ​Technique: The Elevation of Holy Pedagogy
Some educators are coming back. At a liberal arts ​university in ​western Texas, a teacher took a bold stance: there is no screen in the ​classroom. Students write notes, read physical books and complete homework – practices that many might call old, but their ​students thrive. According to his account in The Chronicle, “I ​am ​thanked ​for ​my strict rules ​because they know what the typical high-tech class does at ​its centre of interest. »
This ​alternative, which coñad “Pedagogy Luddite”, is not to ​reject the wholesale technology, but to ​recover the agency in ​the class. For ​him, the goal is not resistance for his ​own good, but an intentional design for deep learning, the type that AI, at least now, cannot reproduce. Students are invited to read to understand, not to ​pass the questionnaires. They are trained to think critically, to write authentically and to participate in discussions that cannot be simulated.
Can AI be a partner instead of an agent?
While some educators draw difficult lines, others ​find ways to integrate IV without giving up ​educational rigour. The ​award-winning research project at Willamette University, “Pedagogical – ​Reviewing Education with AI”, demonstrated this balance. Students Teo Mendoza and Sam Holmes have created a ​tool using OpenAI’s GPT-4 that performs individual tasks based on each student’s ​pace of understanding ​and learning.
In an interview published by Willamette University News, Mendoza said: ​”Our goal is to reduce the exhaustion of trainers by ​eliminating the time needed to create assignments, while helping students with personalized lessons. ​»
Holmes ​added that the tool wasn’t ​just about automation but about tailoring learning to fit students’ needs, essentially giving educators more ​time to focus on direct interaction and mentorship.
Assistant ​Professor Lucas Cordova, a ​team mentor, is also leading a ​broader ​research initiative to ​develop educational tools for software engineering education. Its approach shows how AI can ​support rather than replace human ​educators. The main difference is ​how IV ​is used: as a scaffolding tool for personalized learning, not an eruption that replaces fundamental thought.
How is lifelong learning going in the AI era?
The UNESCO Institute for ​Lifelong Learning (UIL) has identified ​a growing need to reassess how teachers themselves participate in lifelong learning. In collaboration with the ​Normal University of Shanghai, UIL is organizing a web seminar entitled “Lifelong Learning for Teachers in the ​AI Age”, created on ​April 15. Target? Find ​out how AI can be a challenge and a catalyst for rethinking teacher training.
Some key areas ​of the Web address include:
- Motivations and barriers for ​educators embracing AI-driven lifelong learning
- Global initiatives on teachers’ AI competencies
- Curricular innovations for preservice teacher education
- National policies ​supporting lifelong learning
As stated by ​UNESCO, ​”teachers must have the skills they need for the future, including ​the ethical use of IV, knowledge of data ​and problem ​solving”. The urgency ​is clear: preparing students for a technological future begins first by preparing their teachers.
What ​is the continuation of education in the AI era?
Q: Should ​AI replace traditional homework assignments?
A: Not at all. While AI can support personalized learning, tasks that require independent thinking, research and writing must remain intact to feed critical thinking.
Q: Can AI help teachers save time?
A: Yes. ​AI tools can automate routine tasks such as classification and assignment creation, ​allowing teachers to ​focus on mentoring and interaction, provided they are used responsibly.
Q: Is banning screens ​in classrooms the answer?
A: That depends. For ​some ​educators, the removal of screens has improved student concentration and commitment. However, this approach may not be appropriate or practical in all contexts.
Q: How do students respond to low-tech classrooms?
A: Surprisingly well. Many ​students appreciate the structure and approach of these environments, reflecting the reduction of anxiety and better understanding.
Q: What are ​the biggest risks of AI in education?
A: On addiction. When students use AI to avoid learning, it weakens their ability ​to reason, write and think independently – skills crucial to life’s success.
Q: How ​can ​teachers prepare for AI-integrated classrooms?
A: ​Through continuous professional ​development. It is essential to participate in web-based seminars, participate in peer communities and monitor ​the development of tools.
Q: Are ​there any ​global standards ​for teachers and AI?
A: Yes. UNESCO develops competency frameworks to ​guide educators in the ethical ​and effective use of AI.
The history of IV ​in education ​is far from ​being resolved. For some, ​it is a release tool; ​for others, hunger for decline. But ​maybe it doesn’t have to be good. The key lies in who holds ​the chalk or code. As long as teachers maintain their agency and students are forced to think, reflect and participate, the classroom – analog ​or enhanced by AI – can remain an authentic learning space.
