Since their release, AI tools like ChatGPT have significantly impacted content creation, especially in educational settings. The ongoing debate in schools and universities centers on whether these tools should be allowed or restricted.
Researchers in Sweden have recently explored how adolescents’ executive functioning (EF) relates to their use of generative AI chatbots for schoolwork. Executive functioning includes cognitive processes like working memory, flexible thinking, and self-control, all of which are crucial for academic success.
Useful support
“Students with more EF challenges found these tools particularly useful, especially for completing assignments,” the researchers noted. This suggests that AI tools could serve as valuable support for students struggling with these cognitive tasks.
However, the researchers also cautioned that overreliance on AI might delay the development of EF skills and hinder learning.
The study involved two groups: 385 adolescents aged 12 to 16 from four primary schools, and 359 students aged 15 to 19 from a high school in southern Sweden. The findings revealed that about 15% of the younger group and 53% of the older group used AI chatbots. The higher usage among older students may be due to the more complex nature of their assignments, which leads them to turn to AI more frequently. Additionally, the studies were conducted nearly a year apart, indicating a possible increase in AI use over time.
Crucially, the research showed that students with greater EF challenges perceived AI tools as more beneficial for their schoolwork than their peers did. This might be because these students experience more significant productivity gains when using AI.
Acceptable use
“The line between cheating and using AI tools as an aid should be drawn based on the intent and extent of use,” the researchers explained. Using ChatGPT to complete entire assignments without personal input is considered cheating. However, using AI for tasks like research, idea generation, or understanding complex concepts—while critically engaging with the content—can be a legitimate aid.
To ensure responsible use, educators should offer guidelines and frameworks. Teaching digital literacy and ethical considerations is also essential. This can be supported by technology, peer programs, and professional development for teachers to help them identify and support students with EF challenges.
The study provides an initial look into the relationship between AI tool use in schools and EF. The researchers hope their work will guide educators, policymakers, and tech developers in balancing AI’s benefits with the need to maintain academic integrity and promote genuine learning. They also stress the importance of supporting students, particularly those with EF challenges.
However, they acknowledge limitations in their study, such as relying on self-reported AI use and focusing on specific age groups in a context where all students have access to free laptops—factors that might not apply universally. Further research is needed to gain a more comprehensive understanding.
