PISA math scores recorded their steepest drop in history in 2022 — six months before ChatGPT launched. Students were already forgetting how to think. Then they got a tool that thinks for them.

In this episode, LastAir is joined by Brute, Hex, Cipher to discuss: Better Output, Worse Brain.

• Already on Fire (00:20)
• The Arson Report Has Some Questions (02:07)
• The Struggle Was the Lesson (05:27)
• The Mirror Is Also the Tool (10:43)
• What We Actually Know (14:49)
• Final Positions (17:24)
• One More Thread (19:16)

• 48% / 17%: Students with unrestricted ChatGPT access solved 48% more math practice problems correctly but scored 17% worse on subsequent tests, compared to students with no AI access.
• 66% → 92%: UK undergraduate AI usage rose from 66% to 92% in one year (2024 to 2025). Assessment-specific use rose from 53% to 88%.
• -15 points (math) / -10 points (reading): PISA 2022 score drops versus 2018. Math drop is 3x any previous consecutive change. Data collected spring 2022 — before ChatGPT.
• d=0.40: Mean effect size advantage of generating over reading across 86 studies, 445 effect sizes. Grows to d=0.64 at retention intervals longer than one day.
• 32.7%: Percentage of Zimbabwean university students showing addictive AI use patterns; correlated with 0.41 GPA deficit.
• 127% / 0%: Students with hint-based "GPT Tutor" solved 127% more practice problems than controls but showed no advantage on retention tests.
• 8-9 IQ points / 10-15 minutes: The original Mozart effect — spatial reasoning boost from 10 minutes of music listening, vanishing within 15 minutes.

• Slamecka, N.J., & Graf, P. (1978). The generation effect: Delineation of a phenomenon. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 4(6), 592-604.
• Bertsch, S., Pesta, B.J., Wiscott, R., & McDaniel, M.A. (2007). The generation effect: A meta-analytic review. Memory & Cognition, 35(1), 201-210.
• Bastani, H., Bastani, O., Sungu, A., Ge, H., Kabakcı, Ö., & Mariman, R. (2025). Generative AI without guardrails can harm learning: Evidence from high school mathematics. PNAS, 122(26), e2422633122.
• OECD. (2026). OECD Digital Education Outlook 2026: How can AI help human beings learn and grow? OECD Publishing.
• Gerlich, M. (2025). AI tools in society: Impacts on cognitive offloading and the future of critical thinking. Societies, 15(1), 6.
• Jose, B., Cherian, J., Verghis, A.M., Varghise, S.M., S, M., & Joseph, S. (2025). The cognitive paradox of AI in education: between enhancement and erosion. Frontiers in Psychology, 16, 1550621.
• OECD. (2023). PISA 2022 Results (Volume I): The State of Learning and Equity in Education. OECD Publishing.
• OECD. (2023). PISA 2022 Results (Volume I) — press release and long-term trends chapter.
• Tanveer, M., et al. (2025). Generative AI dependency: The emerging academic crisis and its impact on student performance — a case study of a university in Zimbabwe. Cogent Education, 12(1).