Artificial intelligence is rapidly transforming the way students approach education — for better or worse. A new USC report reveals that while most college students use AI tools like ChatGPT to get quick answers, far fewer use them to deepen understanding or build critical thinking skills, unless professors actively guide them. The findings raise important questions about whether generative AI is helping students learn — or simply helping them avoid learning altogether.
The Dual Nature of AI in Higher Education
According to the USC Center for Generative AI and Society, researchers surveyed 1,000 U.S. college students and found that the majority rely on AI for what they call “executive help” — quick solutions requiring minimal effort. Only a smaller fraction use AI for “instrumental help”, which involves using the technology to clarify complex ideas, enhance skills, and foster independent learning.
“Generative AI is here and already having an impact,” said Stephen J. Aguilar, associate professor at the USC Rossier School of Education. “What matters now is whether we use it to deepen learning or avoid it.” This quote captures the heart of the current educational dilemma — AI can either empower students or make them intellectually passive, depending on how it’s integrated into the classroom.
The study also revealed a crucial dynamic: professors play a decisive role in shaping how students use AI. Those who encourage thoughtful and reflective AI use are more likely to see students engage in meaningful, learning-driven ways. In contrast, lack of guidance often leads to superficial reliance on AI for shortcuts.
Educators Worldwide Show Both Caution and Hope
In addition to the student survey, the USC team conducted a global study of 1,505 teachers across five countries — the U.S., India, Qatar, Colombia, and the Philippines. The results paint a complex picture: while educators express concerns about plagiarism, creativity loss, and institutional support gaps, many are still optimistic. About 72% of teachers said AI helps with administrative tasks, 73% believe it enhances student outcomes, and 69% say it supports personalized learning.
“The growth of AI has created both optimism and anxiety,” Aguilar noted, emphasizing that faculty leadership and ethical guidance are essential to ensuring students don’t rely on AI blindly.
AI Writing Tools That Teach — Not Replace — Thinking
Beyond surveys, USC researchers also tested a new tool called ABE (AI for Brainstorming and Editing). Unlike typical AI chatbots that generate ready-made text, ABE is designed to promote critical thinking by guiding students through structured reflection. It helps users strengthen arguments, clarify claims, and explore counterarguments, making AI a true learning companion rather than a shortcut.
According to William Swartout, chief science officer at the USC Viterbi School of Engineering, “If used appropriately, tools like ABE can enhance critical thinking rather than delegate it to the machine.”
A Roadmap for the Future of AI in Education
The USC report concludes with several recommendations for educators and policymakers: encourage instrumental AI use, design tools with built-in reflection prompts, and provide professional development for teachers to boost confidence and ethics in AI adoption. Additionally, it stresses the importance of equity in access, ensuring that all students benefit from AI-driven innovation regardless of institutional resources.
Conclusion
The message is clear: AI is not inherently good or bad — its impact depends on how it’s used. With the right guidance, AI can become an engine for creativity, reflection, and deeper understanding. Without it, it risks turning education into a fast track to forgettable answers. The future of learning will depend not on AI’s capabilities, but on how educators and students choose to use them.
