Former chief scientist Alan Finkel has rejected claims by AI assistants that the technology acts as a “bicycle for the mind”, as new evidence links student use of AI to falling academic results in Australian schools.
Speaking to SBS News on 31 October, Finkel dismissed the framing, promoted by Google’s Gemini assistant, that AI frees up mental energy for creativity. The remarks come as 78 per cent of Australian children now use an AI assistant, and as national NAPLAN results show one in three students failing to meet literacy benchmarks.
What the AI claimed, and why experts pushed back
When asked whether AI makes people less intelligent, Gemini responded that “cognitive scientists view AI as a bicycle for the mind”, claiming the technology handles routine thinking and leaves users free for higher-level work.
Finkel, a neuroscientist, called the answer self-serving.
“I don’t think your brain, or my brain, needs a bicycle to augment it,” he told SBS News. “It is trying to convince us that it is there to help us achieve. Whereas, in this respect, it is there to replace what we do.”
Emeritus Professor James Vickers, a neuroplasticity expert and director at the Wicking Dementia Research and Education Centre, likened AI assistants to a self-driving car: you arrive at your destination without ever thinking about the route.
“The brain is very much a use it or lose it type of organ,” Vickers said. “The more you offload that capacity to AI or a machine, the less capacity you have to do that.”
How many Australian children use AI?
An August report from the eSafety Commissioner found that 78 per cent of Australian children use an AI assistant. ChatGPT is the most popular, used by 70 per cent of them, while Gemini and Copilot are each used by 20 per cent.
One in five children reported daily use, and 28 per cent used an assistant a few times a week. More than 90 per cent use the technology to find information or support learning, 70 per cent for writing or editing, and half for personal or social reasons.
The evidence: AI homework help lowers classroom results
Research on what daily AI use does to a child’s developing brain remains thin. But a two-year study of 27,000 school students, run jointly by the University of Hong Kong and Stockholm University, offers a warning.
Students who used AI for homework scored better on that homework, but performed 20 per cent worse on in-person classwork than students who did not use AI.
Similar concerns are mounting internationally. A report from the University of Minnesota warns that generative AI could disrupt memory and critical thinking, particularly for younger students. In Australia, polling reported by Nine.com.au shows teachers remain broadly wary of AI as a core educational tool.
NAPLAN results show skills slipping
The pattern is already visible in Australia’s national testing. The latest NAPLAN results, released in August 2026, found reading and writing skills declining across every age group tested, covering 1.2 million students in Years 3, 5, 7 and 9. One in three children failed to meet the benchmarks.
Finkel said students who hand their thinking to AI are failing to consolidate their own ideas. A student who asks ChatGPT or Claude to turn dot points into a 2,000-word essay “has failed to really use their brain to consolidate their thoughts into an elegant expression”, he said.
“Sparring partner, not a stunt double”
Dr Grant Blashki, a general practitioner and associate professor at the University of Melbourne’s Centre for AI and Digital Ethics, says the answer is not prohibition but smarter use.
Students should treat AI as a “sparring partner, not a stunt double”, he told SBS News, and educators should assess process rather than output.
“If we are just giving students assignments that they can throw into AI, what are they learning from that?” Blashki said. He has restructured his own assessments around “assured learning”, pairing essays with one-on-one interviews conducted face to face or on Zoom.
What AI dependence means for professionals
The risks extend beyond the classroom. Blashki uses AI daily in his medical practice, transcribing appointments with patient consent. The tool saves time, but he said it can hallucinate, make errors or mishear, and accuracy breeds dependence.
For new doctors entering a system where AI is embedded, the danger is skill loss. “They don’t learn to read the nonverbal cues and the gut feeling you get from practising medicine,” he said.
Blashki, who co-authored the book Artificial Intelligence for Better or Worse, rejects a simple good-versus-bad framing. Teaching young Australians to use AI intelligently, he argued, “is a great investment” for the workforce they are about to enter.
FAQ
Does using AI make students less capable?
A two-year study of 27,000 students found those who used AI for homework scored 20 per cent lower on in-person classwork than peers who did not, even though their homework results improved.
How many Australian children use AI assistants?
According to the eSafety Commissioner, 78 per cent of Australian children use an AI assistant, and 20 per cent of them use one every day.
What did Alan Finkel say about AI?
The former chief scientist dismissed the claim that AI is a “bicycle for the mind” as self-serving, arguing that in some respects the technology replaces thinking rather than supporting it.