How much have students’ ordinary learning processes shifted in response to generative AI, and how does that affect their durable learning outcomes? Self-report surveys show little change, while small-scale behavioral studies report widespread AI use without the scale or duration to measure learning consequences. We address both questions using a ten-year panel of 3.2 million ALEKS learning interactions for the time-on-task analysis, complemented by ALEKS PPL placement-assessment data for the proctoring and retention analyses, with a quasi-experimental design exploiting within-curriculum variation in AI susceptibility: text-based word problems transcribable into AI prompts serve as the treated group; graph-based problems requiring interactive platform manipulation as the comparison. Learning time on AI-susceptible problems declines 2.8% per quarter among college students after ChatGPT’s release, cumulating to 26.9% over eleven quarters; high-schoolers show 31.3%, middle-schoolers 9.0%, and Grade 5 students no detectable change. The divergence vanishes entirely under proctoring for college students, making general efficiency gains unlikely. Logistic fixed-effects models on randomly assigned proctored retention items yield a 25% cumulative decline in odds of correct response; the same estimator on non-proctored assessment produces a large opposite-signed increase — inconsistent with any platform, cohort, or curriculum explanation. These results are among the first large-scale behavioral and outcome evidence that generative AI has altered how students study and the knowledge they build — the population-level indicator of cognitive surrender, with direct implications for educational research, assessment governance, and AI policy.
- Inicie sesión para enviar comentarios