AI tools are becoming part of schoolwork, but new research points to a difficult tradeoff. The same chatbots that can help students organize and finish assignments may also create risks for students who already struggle with core learning skills.
Swedish researchers examined how school-aged children use AI tools and how that use relates to executive functions. Those functions include planning, inhibition, and flexibility, and the study treats them as important cognitive processes for academic success.
What the Swedish research examined
The research focused on the relationship between AI tools used for schoolwork and executive functions. In plain terms, the question was not only whether students use systems like ChatGPT, but how that use connects to the mental skills students need to manage tasks, adapt, and stay on track.
To get a broader view, the researchers conducted two separate studies. One involved younger students with an average age of 14 and 385 participants. The other involved older adolescents with an average age of 17 and 359 participants.
The comparison matters because students at different ages may use AI in very different ways. A tool that is rare among younger students can become common among older students, especially when homework becomes more complex and students have more freedom in how they complete assignments.
Older students used AI chatbots much more often
The results showed a clear difference between the two age groups. Among younger students, only 14.8% used AI chatbots for homework. Among older students, 52.6% used them.
The study also found differences in preferred tools. Boys used ChatGPT more frequently, while girls preferred Snapchat MY-AI. The source does not give a reason for that pattern, so the safest reading is simply that tool choice varied by group.
For schools, the age gap is important. If AI chatbot use is far more common among older adolescents, guidance may need to meet students where they are already using these systems rather than treating AI as a future issue.
Why executive function challenges change the stakes
The most sensitive finding concerns students who reported more executive function problems. These students found AI tools more useful for schoolwork, especially when completing assignments.
That result can be read in two ways. On one hand, AI tools may provide practical support for students with learning disabilities or related challenges. A chatbot can help with planning work, structuring a task, or moving from confusion to a first step.
On the other hand, the researchers warn that the same usefulness could become harmful if the tool replaces the learning process. If a student depends on AI to do the work rather than using it for support, the student may miss the chance to build the very skills that are already difficult.
The distinction is central:
- Support use means AI helps the student plan, clarify, or complete work while the student remains actively involved.
- Substitute use means AI handles too much of the task, reducing the student’s need to practice planning, flexibility, or critical judgment.
The source does not resolve which pattern is more common. It states that it remains unclear whether students use AI tools only for support or rely on them to complete entire tasks independently.
Academic performance did not show a clear link
The study found no significant correlation between the use of AI tools and students’ academic performance. That finding is important because it prevents a simple conclusion that AI use is either clearly improving grades or clearly damaging them.
Instead, the research points to a more complicated issue. AI use may affect how students approach learning even when performance measures do not show a direct relationship. A student might finish more assignments with AI help, but that does not automatically show whether the student is developing stronger skills.
The researchers also raised ethical concerns about students relying on AI to complete entire tasks independently. One risk is uncritical acceptance of AI-generated content, especially when students treat an output as finished work instead of something to question, revise, or verify.
That concern is closely tied to executive functions. Planning and flexibility are not only about getting an assignment done. They also shape whether a student can evaluate information, adjust an approach, and recognize when an answer needs more work.
Stress may push students toward heavier AI use
A related study from Korean universities adds context. Researchers surveyed 300 students with ChatGPT experience and found that stress can significantly increase AI use.
That study connected low academic self-efficacy with more stress. More stress, in turn, promoted higher AI expectations and greater dependency.
Students in that research cited several common negative consequences of AI use: increased laziness, reduced creativity, spread of misinformation, and reduced critical thinking. These concerns do not prove that every student will experience those effects, but they show why dependency is part of the debate.
Taken together, the findings suggest that schools face a practical challenge. AI chatbots are not only productivity tools. They interact with student confidence, stress, learning habits, and the skills students need to develop over time.
The Swedish researchers emphasize the need for guidelines for AI chatbot use in schools. They also call for more research to ensure safe and effective use of AI in education, with attention to fairness and cognitive development.
The key issue is not whether students should ever use AI tools. It is whether schools can help students use them in ways that support learning without turning them into a crutch for the students who may be most vulnerable to that risk.