Dr Noor Liyana Yusof

Food Technology Department

The Rise of AI: From a Supporting Tool to Students’ “Second Brain”

Within a very short period, the emergence of generative AI tools such as ChatGPT, Grammarly, Claude AI, NotebookLM, and Notion AI has significantly transformed how students learn, write, and think. The proliferation of these tools is akin to mushrooms growing after the rain—constantly appearing with newer versions, more advanced features, and subscription packages promising more “pro-level” performance.

On the surface, this phenomenon appears to be a positive advancement that accelerates learning. However, beneath this convenience lies a subtle but profound shift in the structure of learning—from a process of thinking to a process of prompting. Students are no longer constructing answers themselves; instead, they are requesting answers to be constructed for them.

Cognitive Offloading: When Thinking Is Outsourced to Machines

The concept of cognitive offloading refers to the tendency of individuals to transfer cognitive tasks to external tools. In the context of AI, students are increasingly delegating essential processes such as analysis, synthesis, and evaluation to machines.

The core issue is not the use of AI itself, but when it replaces the entire learning process. Without engaging in the cycle of attempting, making mistakes, and refining understanding, students lose the opportunity to build strong cognitive structures. Learning becomes faster—but significantly more superficial.

The Illusion of Excellence: High CGPA, Low Understanding

An increasingly evident phenomenon is the mismatch between academic achievement and actual student competence. There are cases where students with CGPAs as high as 3.8 fail to answer fundamental questions during exit viva examinations.

Although their project reports may appear polished—complete with in-depth discussions and up-to-date references—when asked:

• Why were this methodology chosen?
• What is the rationale behind the analytical decisions?
• How can the findings be applied in real-world contexts?

 

Their responses are often vague, poorly structured, or merely repetitive of what has already been written. This indicates that students do not truly own the knowledge they present.

This leads to a troubling reality:

CGPA is no longer a reliable reflection of a graduate’s true intellectual capability.

Advanced Technology, Declining Thinking: The AI Era Paradox

Generative AI is meant to enhance learning, yet in many instances it creates a paradox—the more advanced the technology, the lower the cognitive effort exerted by students.

With access to Pro subscriptions, students gain:

• more accurate answers
• better structured content
• more convincing arguments

 

However, at the same time:

• they engage less in deep reading
• think less critically
• and practice less independent problem-solving

 

This phenomenon leads to the illusion of competence, where students believe they understand simply because they can recognize correct answers, not because they can generate them independently.

Graduate Quality in a Silent Crisis

The long-term implications of this phenomenon are deeply concerning for graduate quality. Students may excel academically on paper, yet struggle in real-world situations that require spontaneous and analytical thinking.

In professional contexts:

• they lack confidence during interviews
• are unable to respond beyond prepared scripts
• struggle to make decisions without technological assistance

 

More alarmingly, in technical fields such as food science, engineering, and healthcare, these weaknesses may lead to errors that affect safety and quality outcomes. If this trend continues, educational institutions risk producing graduates who are misaligned with industry expectations.

Normalization of Dependency: From Option to Necessity

What was once considered a supplementary tool has now become an unofficial necessity among students. Without AI, many feel incapable of completing tasks effectively.

This dependency not only reduces cognitive effort but also reshapes attitudes toward learning. Intellectual effort is replaced by efficiency in obtaining answers. The value of learning shifts from understanding to merely completing tasks.

AI Is Not the Enemy, but the System Must Adapt

Despite growing criticism, it is unrealistic to reject AI entirely. AI is a powerful tool that can significantly enhance learning when used appropriately.

The real challenge lies in how the education system adapts. Assessment must shift from evaluating outcomes alone to evaluating processes. Methods such as:

• exit viva examinations
• spontaneous presentations
• real-world application-based questions

 

should be expanded to ensure students genuinely understand what they learn.

Restoring the Value of Thinking in Education

In the age of AI, the most valuable skill is no longer the ability to access information, but the ability to evaluate, interpret, and apply it wisely. 

Students must be trained to:

• use AI as a support tool, not a substitute for thinking
• critically question AI-generated outputs
• and build their own understanding before relying on technology

 

Conclusion: True Excellence Cannot Be Outsourced

The rise of generative AI has opened vast opportunities in education, but it has also triggered an invisible crisis—the erosion of thinking ability due to cognitive offloading. If left unaddressed, we risk producing a generation of graduates who excel in numbers but lack intellectual depth. Ultimately, success in the real world is not determined by who has access to the most advanced AI, but by who truly understands what they are doing.

Take home message: Critical thinking, analytical ability, and deep understanding are assets that cannot be transferred to machines—and cannot be purchased through a Pro subscription.

References:

1. Jose, B. (2025). *The Cognitive Paradox of AI in Education. Explains how AI can facilitate learning while also encouraging cognitive dependency.
2. Moluayonge, G. E. (2025). Cognitive Offload as a Mediator of AI Usage and Critical Thinking Development. The study shows that the use of AI increases cognitive offloading and reduces critical thinking skill.
3. Essien et al. (2024). Impact of Generative AI on Critical Thinking. AI accelerates task completion but leads students to bypass deep analytical processes.
4. Risko, E. F. & Gilbert, S. J. (2016). Cognitive Offloading (Trends in Cognitive Sciences). Provides the foundational theory of cognitive offloading — the transfer of mental tasks to external tools (highly important as a theoretical basis).

Date of Input: 04/05/2026 | Updated: 04/05/2026 | nurulizzah