In 2025, one is more likely to come across someone who has used, or at least been exposed to, generative AI at some point than someone who hasn’t. For example, 33% of adults in the U.S. report that they interact with AI at least several times a day, according to the Pew Research Center. After all, this technology has expanded rapidly in recent years, and to many, it feels like an inescapable part of their day-to-day lives; unsurprisingly, its rapid proliferation has also given rise to mixed perspectives on the topic. In this new ecosystem, one of the most debated topics in the AI discussion is its place in education.
As a high schooler, I know a great number of students who have used AI at some point in their studies, and many consider it a valuable tool in the classroom for both teachers and students, as it can ease grading for teachers and lighten the workload for students. However, others have been quick to call out its potential negative effects, in particular the way AI facilitates and enables plagiarism and classroom cheating. This raises the question: Is generative AI beneficial or harmful in the classroom?
To start, it’s important to be familiar with the origins of the AI we know today. The concept of AI predates much of modern technology, but the widely accepted origin of the term came from the English mathematician Alan Turing’s concept of the Turing Test in 1950, which suggested that a computer could have human-like intelligence if it could communicate in conversation in a manner indistinguishable from that of a person.
Since that time–the 1950s–AI has advanced in many distinct ways, all the way up to the launch of the Text-to-Image AI generators like DALL-E in 2021 and the AI chatbot ChatGPT in 2022 (both released by the company OpenAI). While these definitely aren’t the only major advancements in AI technology, they have arguably been among the most revolutionary. ChatGPT, an LLM (Large Language Model) was trained on vast amounts of texts and data to respond to human prompts with sophisticated language, which greatly humanized them to users. The simplicity of these artificial intelligence applications and the ease with which they respond to user prompts make these apps almost seem like something from the future. They also make it much easier to get help on homework problems, go over lessons, and create study materials. But is an AI-driven future for learning really a future we want to live in?
Well, many agree that this unprecedented technology’s impact is neither wholly positive nor negative, and I concur that new technology should be viewed through an objective lens before being branded good or bad. However, I am a teenager whose life is already greatly affected by this technology around me, and from my perspective it’s created an alarming amount of problems for the future of education.
For example, utilizing these applications in class may start off mild with a few questions answered here and there, but indulging in this technology for writing can quickly become a slippery slope of overreliance, cheating, and reduced critical thinking. And this isn’t just baseless speculation–a 2025 study by MIT provided compelling evidence that, in AI-aided vs. unaided essay-writing, analysis of the participants’ brain activity showed that the ones given access to ChatGPT experienced reduced cognition, brain connectivity and memory skills, while contributing to laziness in their writing. Additionally, once they switched to the portion of the study where participants wrote essays unaided, their essays were still similar to one another due to what seems like subconscious influence of AI and were distinctly written without as much originality compared to the other participants.
These are not good signs for our future, as far as education is concerned. Though it is important to note that the effects found in the study are not meant to serve as long-term predictions, it is undeniable that this should be a warning for the future of education. If AI takes its place in the classroom and replaces traditional sources of research and assistance for students, education as we know it–the cornerstone of critical thinking–may be turned into rubble.
In an interview about the subject of AI in the classroom with my AP Lang teacher, Alexis Castillo, she was clear in her stance. She noted, “I don’t personally use it, I don’t believe in it, and I don’t think it benefits my students to use it…” As an educator, she argues that AI is hardly beneficial to students and their critical thinking skills. She went on to insist that AI overreliance “is terrible for the environment and inhibits students from critical thinking and producing original thought.” Castillo urges students to try tackling difficult work on their own and avoid relying on AI–even if they doubt their ability. While she acknowledged AI’s potential to create rubrics quickly and save her time for grading and preparing lessons, she concluded that, hopefully as we move forward, this technology will be able to create “less work to be done outside of the classroom while students and teachers can make use of the class-time they do have together”. Her nuanced perspective highlights the real feelings of teachers around the world, showing the importance of teacher input in the discussion surrounding AI.
And it’s not just writing skills that are at stake here. Another realm of human expression, art, is now also threatened by the growing AI giant of quick content-generation. This begs the fundamental question: could human art be replaced, or even attempted, by technology?
In my experience, DALL-E’s launch in 2021, which predated the launch of ChatGPT, was the start of my disinclination to AI based on these grounds. As a middle-schooler who was devoted to drawing from my imagination every day, it felt like my biggest passion was suddenly no more important than the uninspired pixels of new “AI” artworks. So when that news reached me, I soon gave up on drawing and hardly attempted to try again until my early years of high school. DALL-E’s launch brought the distant dream of AI from an unlikely possibility to a tangible threat against my dream, among the dreams of others, dedicated to pursuing a career in art. In the following years, AI has certainly become more immersive and common in today’s world, and my initial aversion towards this technology was soon replaced by a softer reluctance, though I still typically avoid it due to the environmental costs of AI.
I asked the aforementioned question to my former art teacher Shane Rodems in an interview about the implications of AI on education. He stated his stance of dismissal towards AI, explaining that, “The heart of art education—empathy, emotional expression, cultural awareness, personal voice—remains deeply human.” As a teacher of art of various mediums, he argued that an artwork created by an AI that’s entirely drawn on data it was fed is completely incomparable to an artwork made through the transformative experience of physical human creativity needed to make art. As an art teacher comfortable with many art mediums, he viewed AI art as incomparable to human art, simply because art made by a person requires the undergoing of the transformative experience of making something wholly yours with your own hands. Furthermore, he noted the current limitations and shortcomings of AI, “In fact, at this early point in the AI world it is not even that good yet, so why copy why not use creativity to push your human boundaries…” While Rodems acknowledged its potential as a tool for artists, he strongly concluded that its moral and ethical responsibilities should be assessed before its integrated into any realm of art creation.
So, should AI be accepted in education, or even in the broader world around us? While it is unreasoned to view technology as inherently bad or good, it is clear that we should curb our AI dependence to prevent overreliance so it does not become an unwanted necessity in our daily lives.
