There is something reassuring about a completed worksheet. The answers are filled in, the paragraph is neatly written, and the schoolbag can finally be packed.
Before we tick homework off the evening’s list, it is worth asking our children to explain one of their answers.
That small conversation may tell us more than the worksheet does.
In June 2026, The Economist published an unsettling article titled “Students are doing worse than you think”. It examined weaknesses in literacy and numeracy among university and college students, raising questions about how learners progress through school without mastering the basics. Berkeley’s summary also highlights concerns about rising grades in subjects where AI can do much of the work.
A child struggling to understand a passage or work with fractions needs teaching and practice. Students need a tutor, or a parent, or a teacher to put in the necessary hours to give the student the confidence to tackle a problem without feeling the need to use AI.
Still, we should take the warning seriously. The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), which conducts international education surveys, had already identified declining reading and science performance before the pandemic. The disruption that followed made an existing problem worse. These difficulties were with us before AI became a homework companion.
Now we have a tool that can make those difficulties much easier to hide.
An answer in seconds
It almost seems inevitable that our daily lives will be dictated by AI. The temptation is huge to, instead of using your own experiences and knowledge, ask a chatbot to write a polished essay or to solve complicated mathematical problems.
Imagine a Grade 7 learner tackling a history question about conflict between trekboers and San communities.
To answer this question properly, the child must read the material, understand the competition for land and resources, and explain the connection in a few sentences. There may be some crossing out. The first attempt may not be perfect.
Until AI steps in and provides a fluent paragraph almost instantly...
For a tired parent and a child who wants to finish, that is an attractive shortcut. The trouble is that reading, sorting out the ideas and finding the words were the very things the child needed to practise.
Perhaps this is what worries us when we say AI is “stealing our children’s brains”. Each time it takes over an assignment, it can also take away an opportunity to learn.
A study of nearly 1,000 high-school mathematics learners illustrates the problem. Those using a general AI assistant did better during practice with the tool. When they later had to do it themselves, their grades were 17% lower than those of learners who had practised without AI. A tutor designed with safeguards largely reduced this harm.
That finding does not settle every question about AI in education. It should alert parents, though, to be more aware of how their children interact with AI and whether it will really benefit them in the long run.
We know how tempting it is to help
Parents do this too, of course. We suggest the opening sentence, tidy up the project and explain the maths problem until we have practically answered it ourselves.
Sometimes we are in a hurry. Sometimes watching a child struggle is uncomfortable. Sometimes we simply want everyone to get to bed.
AI makes that kind of rescue available at any time, for almost any task.
Children need help, and some need considerably more support than others. But help should leave them with something to do: a step to try, a choice to explain, a sentence to write themselves. When a learner is completely lost, a teacher’s explanation or a smaller starting point may be more useful than another finished example supplied by AI.
At home, a few habits can help:
- Let your child attempt the question before asking AI or opening the memorandum.
- If help is needed, start with a hint.
- Ask your child to explain an answer in their own words.
- After using AI, close it and try a similar question.
- Check factual answers against the textbook and class notes.
There is no need to turn every evening into an oral examination. One or two questions can be enough to uncover a misunderstanding.
Leave room for the wrong answer
A practice test is useful partly because it shows us what a child cannot yet do.
If a learner gets a question wrong, we have somewhere to start. We can return to the relevant section, talk through the mistake and try again. If every answer has been supplied or polished by AI, it becomes harder to see where support is needed.
The same applies to the answers. They are most useful after an honest attempt. Reading an answer and thinking “Yes, that makes sense” is a different experience from producing it independently.
This simple habit works time and again: attempt, mark, discuss and revisit. Leave enough time between attempts to find out what has stayed with the learner.
Our children will use AI. They will also need to recognise when it is wrong, when an explanation is incomplete and when a confident answer makes very little sense. That judgement depends on knowledge they have made their own.
Tonight, when the homework is finished, ask your child to explain one answer that they have attempted.
The conversation might take two minutes. It may reveal a gap, or give your child the pleasure of explaining something they have finally understood.
Either way, it will tell you something a completed page cannot...
Bibliography:
Bastani, H., Bastani, O., Sungu, A., Ge, H., Kabakcı, Ö. and Mariman, R. (2025). ‘Generative AI without guardrails can harm learning: Evidence from high school mathematics’. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 122(26), e2422633122. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2422633122.
OECD (2023). PISA 2022 Results (Volume I): The State of Learning and Equity in Education. Paris: OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/53f23881-en.
The Economist (2026). ‘Students are doing worse than you think’. 25 June. Read article.
University of California, Berkeley, Center for Studies in Higher Education (2026). ‘Students are doing worse than you think’. 25 June. Summary of coverage in The Economist. Read summary.
