Very timely, Daisy. Wherever I go, it seems that A1 is the subject on everyone's lips - even when I was sitting in the dentist's chair this morning! The two people I was talking to were not so much unenthusiastic as downright terrified about what was coming.
For me, the most challenging question is what happens when we consistently offload cognitive work and outsource it to AI? Does our cognitive ability begin to atrophy? Michael Gerlich from the Center for Strategic Corporate Foresight and Sustainability, SBS Swiss Business School certainly thinks so. He published a study in January, 2025 with 666 participants, which looked at how the use of AI decreases critical thinking through cognitive off-loading.
There's also a new book, The Memory Paradox: Why Our Brains Need Knowledge in an Age of AI by Barbara Oakley, et al. from Oakland University, et al., published in May of 2025. I haven't read it yet but it looks interesting.
Looking forward to your next post. So is Grok, by the looks of things!!
The Memory Paradox, which is actually a chapter in a book, is well worth reading and is freely available online. I wrote a post about it recently on my Substack:
Fantastic analysis. On the subject of technology displacing human skill development we do not talk nearly enough about the advent of photography and how it replaced drawing from observation, which is the foundational skill for all real art and absolutely critical for honing the eye and learning to truly see.
The collapse of traditional architecture and urbanism and the advent of modern architecture and urbanism has much to do with the loss of fundamental drawing and navigational skills in humans, displaced by so much technology. There is a valiant movement to revive traditional architecture and urbanism (eg INTBAU, CSCA and others) but of course technology and industry, driven by short term financial gains of capitalism, are very hard to combat. I truly believe that all the forces trying to revive traditional human skillsets need to join forces.
Thank you for your thoughts! While I'm not as pessimistic, I do see many of the issues you point at in your article. In one of my last pieces, I talked about "paradoxes" of AI in education (I took the framing from Barbara Oakley, but expanded it) and framed the contradictory consequences that we run into due to the way we use AI in education. I also offer a way to handle them, which is similar to what you suggest in your piece: use the AI to create and support "desirable difficulties" in learning (which is how cognitive scientists call the productive struggle that makes learning stick). Maybe you'll find it interesting:
This is a hugely important topic and one that I am increasingly concerned about. The message that writing is actually a way of learning and of deepening knowledge is urgent but seems to be getting lost in the general enthusiasm for AI. Of course AI CAN be useful in education, but we need to place serious guardrails on its use by students. It's just too tempting to outsource writing to bots, especially when writing is a struggle -- which it is all too often for students.
The Writing Revolution book (of which I'm co-author) has as its subtitle "Advancing Thinking Through Writing." I recently spoke to a couple of teachers in a district that has been implementing the method for several years, and each of them independently told me the same thing, which was essentially: When we started using The Writing Revolution, we just wanted to help our students write. But then something amazing happened. As we taught them to write more clearly, they began to think more clearly.
This is the great thing about TWR. In England, when I trained to teach, the focus was all on different "purposes" of writing like writing to inform, persuade, describe, etc. This approach neglected the basic underpinning building blocks of writing which help advance thinking.
Thank you so much for this - I'm just starting the process of gathering all the 'benefits' of writing without AI to encourage my (online) students to understand why writing (and reading) are vital skills to our humanity. The connection between writing and thinking is one I actively try to build into my teaching - an advantage I have is that I can almost literally sit on a student's shoulder as they choose a word or place a paragraph and ask them to explain their choices to me. I hope that even when I'm not asking them, they may internalise those questions!
I would suggest that if you want them to understand the benefits of writing (and reading) without AI, then find an alternative to giving a grade. It may sound impossible, but remember that grades are a mere blip in the history of learning. From the earliest efforts with reading and writing until well into the 19th century, grades were not part of the process. We're imaginative people, we can figure it out -- indeed I know of some who already have!
Not impossible at all - but a great reminder here! I actively avoid grading unless the work is an exam-style assessment. I mostly teach IB and A’Level but also IGCSE now, where grades determine a student’s next step. But I work with them in a way that enables them to build and strengthen foundations, and I teach them how to self-assess. It’s that back-and-forth of dialogue, the questioning, the wondering, the suggesting plus reflection that I try to keep at the heart. Much easier in one-to-one tutoring, but this was my classroom practice, too, as best as possible, when I still worked in one 😊
Thanks for the read! One very real consequence is that if AI replaces too much of the learning process the (un?)forseen consequence is further inequality in schools. Knowledge inequality grows between those pupils who do know how to write using a pen and AI, and those pupils whose use of AI does not present them with the opportunity of developing 'analogue' skills.
I absolutely rate the point that writing is a great way to elaborate, reconsider and develop thoughts - as well as prevent them from dissipating - but I would add that there are lots of other ways humans have found to do this as well. Sketching, short form note taking, flow-charts, mind maps, discussion, presentation and verbal feedback, reading - indeed teaching itself is of course a valuable way to engage in meaningful thought and re-thought. 'No AI for learners' or 'always AI for learners' - as ever in education, both of these extremes are problematic; a worthwhile future education system needs to find the practical and workable ways to balance inbetween.
Very timely, Daisy. Wherever I go, it seems that A1 is the subject on everyone's lips - even when I was sitting in the dentist's chair this morning! The two people I was talking to were not so much unenthusiastic as downright terrified about what was coming.
For me, the most challenging question is what happens when we consistently offload cognitive work and outsource it to AI? Does our cognitive ability begin to atrophy? Michael Gerlich from the Center for Strategic Corporate Foresight and Sustainability, SBS Swiss Business School certainly thinks so. He published a study in January, 2025 with 666 participants, which looked at how the use of AI decreases critical thinking through cognitive off-loading.
There's also a new book, The Memory Paradox: Why Our Brains Need Knowledge in an Age of AI by Barbara Oakley, et al. from Oakland University, et al., published in May of 2025. I haven't read it yet but it looks interesting.
Looking forward to your next post. So is Grok, by the looks of things!!
The Memory Paradox, which is actually a chapter in a book, is well worth reading and is freely available online. I wrote a post about it recently on my Substack:
https://nataliewexler.substack.com/p/how-generative-ai-can-rot-your-brain
Fantastic analysis. On the subject of technology displacing human skill development we do not talk nearly enough about the advent of photography and how it replaced drawing from observation, which is the foundational skill for all real art and absolutely critical for honing the eye and learning to truly see.
Yes, that’s a great analogy. I think back in the 18th century the Royal Navy used to teach drawing to its cadets - it was a vital skill.
The collapse of traditional architecture and urbanism and the advent of modern architecture and urbanism has much to do with the loss of fundamental drawing and navigational skills in humans, displaced by so much technology. There is a valiant movement to revive traditional architecture and urbanism (eg INTBAU, CSCA and others) but of course technology and industry, driven by short term financial gains of capitalism, are very hard to combat. I truly believe that all the forces trying to revive traditional human skillsets need to join forces.
This is such a sensible analogy and provides some much needed clarity around this topic! Thank you for sharing.
Thank you for your thoughts! While I'm not as pessimistic, I do see many of the issues you point at in your article. In one of my last pieces, I talked about "paradoxes" of AI in education (I took the framing from Barbara Oakley, but expanded it) and framed the contradictory consequences that we run into due to the way we use AI in education. I also offer a way to handle them, which is similar to what you suggest in your piece: use the AI to create and support "desirable difficulties" in learning (which is how cognitive scientists call the productive struggle that makes learning stick). Maybe you'll find it interesting:
https://www.kognitivo.net/p/three-paradoxes-of-ai-in-education
Writing is indeed a timleless a tool for developing thinking.
We're cross-posting this one for sure!
This is a hugely important topic and one that I am increasingly concerned about. The message that writing is actually a way of learning and of deepening knowledge is urgent but seems to be getting lost in the general enthusiasm for AI. Of course AI CAN be useful in education, but we need to place serious guardrails on its use by students. It's just too tempting to outsource writing to bots, especially when writing is a struggle -- which it is all too often for students.
The Writing Revolution book (of which I'm co-author) has as its subtitle "Advancing Thinking Through Writing." I recently spoke to a couple of teachers in a district that has been implementing the method for several years, and each of them independently told me the same thing, which was essentially: When we started using The Writing Revolution, we just wanted to help our students write. But then something amazing happened. As we taught them to write more clearly, they began to think more clearly.
This is the great thing about TWR. In England, when I trained to teach, the focus was all on different "purposes" of writing like writing to inform, persuade, describe, etc. This approach neglected the basic underpinning building blocks of writing which help advance thinking.
This is excellent, Daisy. Thank you.
🙂👍
Daisy and interested others, the Gerlich book is The AI tools in Society: Impacts on Cognitive Offloading and the Future of Critical Thinking, 2025.
Thank you so much for this - I'm just starting the process of gathering all the 'benefits' of writing without AI to encourage my (online) students to understand why writing (and reading) are vital skills to our humanity. The connection between writing and thinking is one I actively try to build into my teaching - an advantage I have is that I can almost literally sit on a student's shoulder as they choose a word or place a paragraph and ask them to explain their choices to me. I hope that even when I'm not asking them, they may internalise those questions!
I would suggest that if you want them to understand the benefits of writing (and reading) without AI, then find an alternative to giving a grade. It may sound impossible, but remember that grades are a mere blip in the history of learning. From the earliest efforts with reading and writing until well into the 19th century, grades were not part of the process. We're imaginative people, we can figure it out -- indeed I know of some who already have!
Not impossible at all - but a great reminder here! I actively avoid grading unless the work is an exam-style assessment. I mostly teach IB and A’Level but also IGCSE now, where grades determine a student’s next step. But I work with them in a way that enables them to build and strengthen foundations, and I teach them how to self-assess. It’s that back-and-forth of dialogue, the questioning, the wondering, the suggesting plus reflection that I try to keep at the heart. Much easier in one-to-one tutoring, but this was my classroom practice, too, as best as possible, when I still worked in one 😊
Thanks for the read! One very real consequence is that if AI replaces too much of the learning process the (un?)forseen consequence is further inequality in schools. Knowledge inequality grows between those pupils who do know how to write using a pen and AI, and those pupils whose use of AI does not present them with the opportunity of developing 'analogue' skills.
I absolutely rate the point that writing is a great way to elaborate, reconsider and develop thoughts - as well as prevent them from dissipating - but I would add that there are lots of other ways humans have found to do this as well. Sketching, short form note taking, flow-charts, mind maps, discussion, presentation and verbal feedback, reading - indeed teaching itself is of course a valuable way to engage in meaningful thought and re-thought. 'No AI for learners' or 'always AI for learners' - as ever in education, both of these extremes are problematic; a worthwhile future education system needs to find the practical and workable ways to balance inbetween.