A.I. is a Tool, Not a Crutch

April 26, 2026 (Sunday) – Kaylyn Tu

By the end of 2026, amidst one thousand submitted student reports, 26% of essays were flagged as AI-generated on Turnitin's data. Based on 200 million submissions, the proportion of students in the classroom utilizing generative AI tools in their academic fields has surged from 53% in 2023 to 88% in 2024. At the same time, AI didn't fall short on students, because by 2025, 60% of teachers were already implementing AI into their workforce to handle routine tasks and grading. 

‘It is almost unheard of to see changes in behaviour as large as this in just 12 months. The results show the extremely rapid rate of uptake of generative AI chatbots,” Josh Freeman, Policy Manager at HEPI (Higher Education Policy Institute), said. 

HEPI’s report highlights the heightened pace at which generative AI is taking over classrooms and their submitted works, where the future generation may or may not see more of AI’s manifestation within educational systems. At some point in the future, classrooms will have the potential to work much more efficiently than they used to be, with AI-generated images, scripts, and personalized chatbots replacing the traditional learning system that was deemed far too mentally draining. 

“They are now deeply embedded in higher education, and many students see them as a core part of the learning process. Universities should take heed: generative AI is here to stay.” Said Josh Freeman. 

Freeman's response to AI introduces the modern concern the world is facing, where generative AI will continue to persist as a learning tool despite concerns of ethicality and academic integrity, because it is ultimately up to these learning systems to aid students in utilizing AI tools as independent learners in the long run. 

The IB (International Baccalaureate) program permits AI integration in the classroom, while encouraging transparent and ethical use that are supported by IB educator-verified guidelines on RevisionDojo. Certified by past graduates and educators, the site acknowledges AI as a support tool rather than a shortcut, setting high standards of honesty that defines its curriculum. 

AI-driven intelligent tutoring systems offer personalized guidance, simulating a 24/7, one-on-one session that could potentially benefit more feedback-driven learners. In lowering the administrative time by effectively identifying personal knowledge gaps and abilities, educators can use AI analytical data to continuously refine teaching strategies, allowing these trained professionals to shine at what they do best, which is offering emotional guidance that not only transfers information to their students, but to inspire and motivate them at the same time. 

Furthermore, arguments arise that AI might actually be raising the academic standards and the cost-to-quality ratio. With much of the paid “work hours” for educators that end up being spent on routine tasks such as grading, scheduling, and record management, AI-powered platforms such as “Khanmigo” and “DreamBox” can reach a larger number of students with the same expenses, making quality education substantially more accessible. 

On the flip side, integration still requires careful consideration in regard to the overall sustenance. Without the habit of deliberating in a comprehension-driven mindset, users can easily fall into the hole of cognitive offloading while using AI tools. Reports from the co-writing of Professor of Philosophy and Director, Nir Eisikovits, and Junior Research Fellow, Jacob Burley, proved this point, stating how AI offering cognitive offloading is eroding the learning process, and that no shortcut or tool can replace the rewarding feeling of  “Eureka”  after pushing through a cognitive disequilibrium. 

The report states that while technology can reduce the mental effort for a task, it also lessens one's critical thinking abilities through long-term usage. To put it in context, the act of cognitive offloading is similar to the Amblyopia disorder, commonly known as the "lazy eye," where if cognitive effort isn't habitually strained, the brain simply doesn't put effort into the task, allowing itself to depend on a direct answer (typically responses that AI offers). Following this process, users tend to ask AI to “dumb down” the given text, reinforcing the connection between an instant answer and the AI tool. 

However, the users are not to blame. Faculties admit that generative AI is inevitable to avoid, which is where hybrid guidelines come into the picture. It should be a standard for ethical AI use to be taught in schools. A criterion includes the JALT's Golden Rule, addressing a balanced use of AI and academic integrity that should follow the accomplishments of: 1) Prompt clarity, 2) Revision of AI-generated drafts 3) Adherence to school policies, 4) Verification of AI output, 5) Accession of relevance and appropriateness, 6) Demonstration of academic integrity, and 7) Avoidance of confidentiality-sharing. 

Because AI provides the desired academic outcomes, offers personalized guidance, and increases productivity, its ultimate concern lies not in preventing its usage, but instead in how faculties choose to integrate ethical and sustainable practice for its students to develop within society's rapidly-evolving workforce.

Kaylyn Tu 

Grade 9

International School of Ho Chi Minh City 

Written on April 26, 2026 (Sunday)