Is Generative AI making us dumber?

Dr Anwar Halari, Senior Lecturer in Accounting at The Open University.

Generative AI and learning: what we might lose

“ChatGPT, please summarise this article for me”

AI would probably do a great job of this and no doubt it will save the reader some time – but it might miss the subtle irony, humour or at the very least the human connection 

I’ve thought about this a lot and I worry about how the convenience of Generative AI is robbing us of our very essence of being humans: real human connection.

I find myself reading more and more AI written material that I am having to review, mark or provide feedback. Just recently as I was reviewing an article for academic publication, I caught myself thinking “not another ‘delve’ again!”. 

Can you imagine providing feedback to AI written material? I can tell you it’s very depressing. Now imagine if I start using AI for grading or setting assessments. It is entirely conceivable that we could find ourselves in a situation where students use AI to write assignments, and professors use AI to produce and grade them. Sounds like a pitch for the next Black Mirror episode, doesn’t it?

Think of your favourite book that you absolutely adore. If I told you that the author of that book was an AI, how would you feel? And why would you feel that way? We enjoy sports because we get to see the world’s best come together to compete. Would it be the same watching the two very best robot football teams battle it out? Perhaps we may see this at some point in the future, however it wouldn’t be the same because we cannot relate to robots the way we relate to humans. 

It is no hidden secret that AI, more specifically Generative AI, is transforming our lives in a whole variety of ways. More importantly, it is changing the way we learn, teach, and do research – the very fundamentals of human knowledge creation and intellectual engagement.

I am certainly not against AI in academia, as there are numerous benefits and opportunities of it as highlighted by a recent paper Ballantine, Boyce and Stoner (2024), A critical review of AI in accounting education: Threat and opportunity, Critical Perspectives on Accounting,
Volume 99, March 2024 by well-renowned colleagues in my field of accounting. But much like social media in our pockets, once the technology is out, warts and all, there is certainly no going back and there is something undeniably dystopian about it – at least from where I stand as an educator.

Polished but empty: the cost of Generative AI in learning

Generative AI is creeping into teaching material, research and student submissions. I am increasingly seeing material that is shallow, generic, and disengaged – clearly AI-written with no real human touch. 

Looking back at the past 15 years in education, I’ve never been more concerned about the student experience or the value they’re receiving from their education than I am today. I sit on university committees where we hear students are being referred for academic integrity issues due to the use of AI without any acknowledgement.

Today’s students have access to countless AI tools that promise to simplify learning. And this is precisely the problem. When students rely on AI, they give up on their critical thinking process that is essential for intellectual growth. Why wrestle with the nuances of a philosophical argument when an AI tool can summarise it all for you and present a beautifully polished, grammatically accurate essay? Why read multiple sources and piece together all that information into a coherent essay? Why spend time to let ideas breathe and grow?

Students want to use Generative AI to simply “get the learning done”. But there are no shortcuts to learning. It takes time to find your voice, to get your facts right and express yourself in your own style.

One student even admitted that after years of its use, he has lost confidence in writing even the most basic things without the use of AI. Assuming he is the first of many to follow, what does that mean for society?

We are at a risk of producing a society of passive consumers of knowledge without truly interacting with it. AI may be killing off the spirit of inquiry that education is meant to ignite, and it is making us all the dumber for it. I’ve already seen students uncritically accepting the results of AI as truth despite the output containing important mistakes.

As someone who has reviewed numerous AI-generated material, I’ve been thoroughly unimpressed by it; not only do its outputs contain occasional inconsistencies, unverified information or errors (hallucinations), they’re also far from the quality and rigour of material written by professionals (at least for now).

Worse still, the use of Generative AI for educational content risks standardising education to the point where creativity and spontaneity – and even, dare I say, provocative ideas that challenge norms are stifled. There is now an increased pressure or enthusiasm (whatever you want to call it) to integrate AI into curriculum. This is when algorithms stop being tools and start shaping our learning.

A call to reflexivity

AI in some form will inevitably be almost everywhere in our daily lives. The challenge is not to reject AI but to use it judiciously and to not lose the human connection that true learning requires. A recent THE podcast Ren, Bowen and Patel (2025), THE podcast: the pros and cons of AI in higher education, Times Higher Education captures this – discussing how we need to identify where thinking must be preserved, where it’s acceptable to offload the cognitive load to AI, how we might use pedagogy in new ways, as well as the environmental impact and ethical implications of such choices.

AI’s benefits are undeniable and of course there’s far more to AI than large language models. We as a society do see its value – you just have to look at the soaring market valuations of AI related companies. 

We already live in one of the loneliest generations, so why hand off one of the main things humans really excel at – teaching and connecting. 

It’s certainly a very useful tool, but if we depend too much on it, (which is all too easy) we risk dulling our own ability to reason and connect – things that make us deeply human. We often talk about the fear of AI taking our jobs – well, maybe they already have, and we haven’t even realised it because we are still getting paid. 

Now then, since you have reached the end of this article, try this prompt for a quick summary: “ChatGPT, please summarise this article for me”.

Further reading and resources

Ballantine, Boyce and Stoner (2024), A critical review of AI in accounting education: Threat and opportunity, Critical Perspectives on Accounting, Volume 99, March 2024. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpa.2024.102711 (Accessed: 28 May 2025).

Ren, Bowen and Patel (2025), THE podcast: the pros and cons of AI in higher education, Times Higher Education. Available at: https://www.timeshighereducation.com/campus/podcast-pros-and-cons-ai-higher-education (Accessed: 28 May 2025).

About Dr Anwar Halari

Anwar Halari is a Senior Lecturer in Accounting at The Open University and Senior Fellow of the Higher Education Academy, with over 15 years of experience in teaching accounting. His current research is interdisciplinary and centres on accountability, sustainability and governance – with a particular interest in the evolving role of accountants and how accountabilities are enacted within governance structures in everyday organisational practices. Anwar is also an active member of several professional associations and serves on the Executive Board of the British Accounting and Finance Association’s Interdisciplinary Perspectives Special Interest Group (BAFA IPSIG).

How to cite this article: Halari, A. (2025) ‘Is Generative AI making us dumber?’, Accounting Cafe. Available at: https://accountingcafe.org/2025/05/28/is-generative-ai-making-us-dumber/. Retrieved: [insert date].

© AccountingCafe.org

Part of the Pedagogy series

Join the Accounting Cafe community