School researchers reviewed nearly 200 studies on how synthetic intellect affects children and young people’s capability to study and think. They established that we cognize extremely small concerning how AI use impacts younger academy children.
Denne saken er også tilgjengelig på norsk
In brief
Researchers wanted to discover out how AI tools power students' crucial thinking and problem-solving abilities. They analysed 173 global studies that had looked at the use of generative synthetic intellect (GenAI) in academy and education. Findings:
“It is striking how small firm cognition we have concerning how AI use affects essential skills in younger pupils. This is problematic, since the power occurs during schoolchildren are motionless developing,” says Hilde Storrøsæter, PhD investigation chap at NTNU’s Department of Teacher Education.
Storrøsæter has analysed 173 global investigation articles on the use of generative synthetic intellect (machine learning techniques anywhere the goal is not lone to analyze data, but additionally to create new data, for example in the form of text, images, audio, video or programming code. The most general use of generative AI is through chatbots, specified as ChatGPT) in academy activity and education. Her study was conducted alongside a collection of colleagues from Czech universities.
The goal of the writings assessment was to discover out whether AI tools fortify or weaken children and youths’ capability to think critically and resolve problems independently. Many group accept that these skills have never been additional crucial than now, in the 21st century.
The dual nature of AI
“The most crucial finding is that AI in and of itself does not create us any improved or worse at thinking. It’s uncomplicated to accept that the tools volition either fortify or weaken learning. We established a apparent dual effect. The identical innovation can do both,” stated Storrøsæter, who is additionally a geographer and instructor who focuses on subject-matter pedagogy.
“The study confirms the dual nature of AI. The identical innovation can have the two constructive and destructive effects. We were amazed that this came throughout so clearly,” says Hilde Storrøsæter, a PhD investigation chap at NTNU’s Department of Teacher Education. Photo: NTNU
AI tools assistance crucial skills whenever they are used to challenge, ask questions, difference distinct viewpoints and build one’s own row of reasoning.
“But whenever AI becomes a shortcut to a ready-made answer, the chance of overdependence, additional superficial thinking and weakened autonomous issue solving increases,” Storrøsæter says.
Abandoning Google – choosing AI
The Norwegian Media Authority’s survey (in Norwegian) on the media habits of 9 to 18-year-olds shows that the use of Google searches cut from 72% in 2024 to 47% in 2026 for this age group.
The study shows that 39% of Norwegian 11 to 12-year-olds use AI.
The website ung.no – Norway’s online data and communication conduit for young group old 13 to 20 – is additionally losing traffic since young group are switching to AI tools to discover answers to their questions. The figure of visits to ung.no cut from 24 myriad to 18 myriad from 2024 to 2025. Google’s new AI summaries have additionally influenced the decrease in traffic.
A cognition gap uncovered
The researchers analysed studies from 2022 – the twelvemonth that AI tongue models swept onto the earth phase – and up to the fountain of 2025. Few predicted the power and speed alongside which innovation would alter society. AI affects how data is created, used, shared and disseminated. The consequences are particularly important in schools and instructional settings.
The learning field has already been shaped by AI. The inquiry is whether we can form the use of AI.
Research on the use of AI in learning should provision direction for pedagogy, guideline and investigation in the site to assistance authorities and another institutions create decisions on AI use.
Storrøsæter and her colleagues uncovered three important gaps in what we cognize concerning AI use.
Knowledge gap 1: Children and youths
In 80% of the studies the researchers analysed, the participants were university or university students. This method that we cognize amazingly small concerning the scholarly and cognitive effects of AI use on children and youths, at a period during they are motionless evolving how they perceive, procedure and measure information.
“We can’t merely assume that what applies to a 22-year-old university pupil additionally applies to a 10- or 14-year-old,” says Storrøsæter.
“If AI takes complete the thinking procedure before pupils have had period to create their own skills for crucial thinking and issue solving, the consequences could be entirely distinct for them than for adults,” she says.
You power additionally like: “We must create thinkers. Not crammers and fact-experts”
Knowledge gap 2: Lack of objectivity
Most of the articles in the writings assessment are according to self-reporting. This is considered a small dependable method than goal studies of changes complete time.
Knowledge gap 3: Geographic bias
The academy researchers additionally uncovered a geographically skewed allocation in anywhere the studies were done. South Asia, Southeast Asia and East Asia – chiefly China – dominate alongside 28 studies. In Europe, Spain and the United Kingdom led alongside nine studies each.
A total of 15 studies were conducted in the USA. Africa, South America and Central Asia are earnestly underrepresented. This creates a investigation gap that have to be addressed.
Overall, the studies display affirmative effects additional frequently than negative ones.
Mostly affirmative findings:
- Of 139 studies on the consequence of AI on crucial thinking, 67 reported lone affirmative effects of AI use.
- 33 studies reported lone negative effects, during 39 reported the two affirmative and negative effects.
- Of 103 studies that examined the consequence of AI on problem-solving ability, 57 were exclusively positive.
- 23 reported negative effects, the identical figure that reported the two affirmative and negative effects.
The dual project of instructor education
The researchers rearward the new writings assessment emphasize three crucial issues in particular: How AI tools are used, teachers’ understanding of AI, and the demands teachers location on students and pupils.
“Teacher learning has a dual task. We have to instruct teachers who can use and connect critically to AI themselves. At the identical time, our learning students should additionally be capable to instruct children and young group how to use AI. It is not adequate to fair instruct them to use several AI tools,” says Storrøsæter.
For us to win alongside AI in schools, instructor learning has to succeed.
“Students need to comprehend what innovation does to the learning procedure itself, specified as what happens whenever AI solves parts of the task. Which parts of the thinking procedure are crucial for the pupils to motionless do themselves? How do we scheme tasks anywhere AI becomes a tool, and not a replacement, for thinking?”
Can create risen disparities
Storrøsæter is not concerned concerning students’ or pupils’ use of AI in and of itself.
“I assistance being restrictive in conditions of not using AI alongside extremely young pupils. But whenever AI is used, it has to happen on the teacher’s terms,” she says.
If AI is used uncritically, you don’t build any skills alongside it, and you young female out on a lot of learning situations. This volition lone addition disparities between those who use AI critically and as a tool, and those who use it uncritically merely to complete a project faster. If that happens, schools and universities volition the two visage important challenges.
We need to form the use of AI, not the another way around
Technology volition likely continue to create faster than we can put curricula and regulations in place. Our figure one project is hence to cultivate AI literacy, by protecting and evolving competence in crucial thinking, issue solving, origin criticism and the capability to create autonomous assessments.
“The learning field is already powerfully influenced and shaped by AI. The inquiry is whether we can form the use of AI so that it supports students’ thinking alternatively of taking it over.”
Storrøsæter stresses that if we are to win alongside AI in schools, instructor learning has to succeed.
Reference: Tomáš Bendl, Lenka Krajňáková, Hilde Storrøsæter, Emil Drápela, Martin Hanus: Dual Nature of GenAI: Catalyst or Barrier for Critical Thinking and Problem-Solving Skills? A systematic Review, Journal of Information Technology Education: Research • Volume 25 • 2026 • https://doi.org/10.28945/5834
