Critics of artificial intelligence (AI) have long warned that dependence on AI could erode our critical thinking skills. A recent study from researchers at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) suggests that our brains are less engaged when we use language learning models (LLM) such as ChatGPT to do the thinking for us. The findings pose a new challenge for the Department of Education (DepEd) as it explores AI to help avert the Philippines’ learning crisis.
In the study, participants were grouped into three and tasked with writing essays. The “brain-only” group had to write their essays without any external assistance, while the search engine group and LLM group had to write essays assisted by Google and ChatGPT, respectively. The researchers found that essays written with AI were more likely to sound the same, and that their writers aren’t able to remember or quote from the essays.
“We found that the brain-only group exhibited strong variability in how participants approached essay writing across most topics,” the report said. “In contrast, the LLM group produced statistically homogeneous essays within each topic, showing significantly less deviation compared to the other groups.”
The study also showed that brain connectivity lessened with the amount of external support. Participants from the brain-only group exhibited the strongest and widest-ranging connectivity within the brain. In contrast, the LLM group showed the least connectivity, which means their brains worked less than those who wrote their essays with Google and without assistance.
AI for Teachers, Not Students
A 2025 report by the Second Congressional Commission on Education (EDCOM 2) stated that students across the basic education system were generally one to two years behind curriculum expectations and unable to read at their grade level. The Functional Literacy, Education, and Mass Media Survey conducted in late 2024 also showed that 18 million Filipinos who graduated from basic education are functionally illiterate, or lacking the literacy needed to deal with everyday situations and work.
Among the commission’s solutions to the country’s burgeoning education crisis is the acquisition or development of AI to “support under-resourced communities and stakeholder groups in the Philippine education system, particularly public school teachers.”
The commission cited a study from the University of the Philippines Center for Integrative and Development Studies as saying that AI can be used for “task automation, data collection, and support for diverse teaching approaches.”
“As we stand at this technological crossroads, it becomes crucial to understand the full spectrum of cognitive consequences associated with LLM integration in educational and informational contexts,” the MIT researchers wrote in the report. “While these tools offer unprecedented opportunities for enhancing learning and information access, their potential impact on cognitive development, critical thinking, and intellectual independence demands a very careful consideration and continued research.”
The commission has not expressed any interest in promoting or using AI as a tool for students. If it can ease the workload of educators, especially in the public school system, it may help teachers provide better education. But if used widely by students to write essays and do homework, AI may raise a generation of students unable to read and think for themselves.
