Adriane Alston
Editorial Editor
Photo via Instagram/@winthropu
Image featuring Big Stuff made from AI
Artificial intelligence (AI) has rapidly become a consistent presence in the daily lives of humans and students in particular, dictating how people perform research, engage with academia and even complete basic tasks. As the influence of AI grows, so do the concerns about its effect on individuals to think independently and critically.
From AI-generated grocery lists circulating on social media for the new diet fad to automated summaries dominating online search engines like Google, many everyday decisions are now being replaced by this newfound facet of technology. While these tools can offer a sense of efficiency, some educators and students worry they may also discourage the components of deeper engagement that used to be more prevalent towards the beginning of our educational careers.
On platforms like Tiktok, routine-based content has surged significantly in its popularity. Users frequently share pre-made self–care schedules, their meal plans of the week and a diverse array of productivity based systems. Although these trends can be helpful in a way, they also simplify decisions that were once part of personal judgment, creativity and a pivotal part of self development.
Search engines represent a similar shift. AI-generated responses populate search results before the original sources of information, streamlining access to information but potentially limiting exploration of multiple credible sources. This change raises questions about whether users are becoming more passive in how they gather knowledge, whatever that knowledge may be.
The debate is especially visible in academic environments. Many schools and universities have aimed to adopt a universal approach to AI, leaving educators divided. Some encourage the incorporation of AI into coursework as a tool for brainstorming or editing, while others restrict or discourage its use altogether, while others have names for their AI device of choice.
This inconsistency creates challenges for students, particularly in the earlier stages of their academic careers. As an aspiring educator, I see how in middle school classrooms, AI is being used to quickly generate answers or complete assignments in their entirety. While this can help students keep up, it may also reduce opportunities to practice essential skills such as analysis, interpretation and problem-solving, actively contributing to the literary crisis that is currently dominating our country.
The issue reflects broader concerns about the gaps currently in our education system. Rather than solely focusing on AI as the problem, I would argue that its widespread usage highlights existing weaknesses in how students are taught to learn and retain information. Even college-aged students have gaps in knowledge pertaining to concepts that are seemingly easy to grasp, like MLA or APA format (I myself sometimes being a victim).
At the same time, AI’s occasional convenience is difficult to ignore. Tasks that once required sustained effort, such as the brainstorming portion of drafting essays, organizing ideas or researching topics, can now be completed in seconds. This shift has begun to alter and distort expectations around productivity and speed. But just because it’s fast doesn’t mean it’s necessarily better.
As a result, slower, more deliberate processes may feel like a newfound burden. The growing reliance on instant solutions contributes to what some would describe as a culture focused on immediacy, where efficiency is prioritized over the depth of experiences.
Beyond the field of education, AI is also reshaping professional spaces. Automated systems are becoming more common in customer service–based roles, including drive-thru ordering like at our neighborhood Bojangles or in call centers. While businesses benefit from increased efficiency, some customers find the experience less satisfying due to the absence of human interaction that can often be a sense of comfort.
Concerns about job displacement are extremely relevant in the broader conversation. Although AI can handle tasks that are repetitive in nature, it also introduces new limitations, including the occasional inaccuracies and a lack of nuance in responses, due to the responses being surface level in nature. These shortcomings reinforce the idea that human judgment still plays a critical role in the workplace.
Despite the concerns, experts agree that removing AI from daily life is unrealistic at this point in time. Its integration into widely used technologies makes complete avoidance unlikely. Instead, attention is shifting toward responsible usage.
Finding a balance has become a central goal. Educators are exploring ways to teach students how to use AI as a support-based tool rather than a replacement for thinking or a crutch to learning. This includes encouraging critical evaluation of AI-generated content and maintaining traditional learning methods alongside new technologies.
Companies also face increasing pressure to address the ethical considerations that come with AI usage, including transparency, accuracy and the extent to which the environment is negatively impacted by this “tool.” As AI continues to evolve, these factors are expected to play a larger role in how systems are developed and implemented.
Ultimately, the conversation surrounding AI is not about completely rejecting innovation but about understanding its consequences. As society adapts, the challenge will be preserving the ability to think independently while benefiting from the tools designed to make life easier.
