University students find GenAI useful for getting better grades and efficiency but not for learning.
By Justin Tai
University student Lau Tsz Ho used to spend hours or even days struggling to solve difficult science questions from classes. He might not find the answers in the end, but he still tried hard.
Now, he just feeds the questions he cannot solve to Generative Artificial Intelligence, better known as GenAI, and gets instant answers with a smart device in his hand.
University student Lau Tsz Ho uses GenAI to tackle science problems on his laptop
“GenAI is not just a tool. It’s my lifesaver. A messiah,” the science major student says.
“If AI disappeared tomorrow, I’d probably be kicked out of my university. Without it, my grades would fall, and I wouldn’t be able to work out answers for my study on my own,” the Year 2 student says.
Students like Lau emphasise that they use GenAI in accordance with the course outlines provided by their universities for research and learning support. However, they admit they find that despite following these guidelines, they have doubts about whether they are truly learning or just prompting their way through GenAI.
“I feel like I’m not using my brain anymore. I feel dumber the more I rely on AI for schoolwork,” he shares.
“I basically just dump questions to GenAI and hope for the best. Whether it’s about solving complex equations, writing lab reports, or preparing PowerPoint presentations,” he says.
“Sometimes I don’t even know what the machine is talking about, but it sounds smart, so I go with it,” he adds.
Yet, his grade cards show a different story. “I used to get Bs and Cs. Now, I’m seeing As and A-minuses, even though I’m not actually learning anything,” he says.
According to a 2025 survey done by the UK-based Higher Education Policy Institute, 88 percent of students in the UK had used GenAI tools for their assessments, from explaining complex concepts to brainstorming research ideas.
In Hong Kong, universities are responding to this shift cautiously. All eight public universities now offer access to an array of GenAI tools designed to support student learning, from writing assistants to coding tools. These tools are integrated under each institution’s ethical guidelines, which emphasise transparency, academic integrity, and responsible use.
Another university student, Liu Sai Ho was sceptical about the use of GenAI at first, but his view changed after GenAI helped him score A- for an assignment.
“I was hesitant at first. GenAI gives you answers so fast that I don’t need to process anything in my head. I was scared of losing my ability to think critically,” the architecture major student says.
Liu has integrated GenAI into his study after taking a digital literacy course which taught students how to use AI responsibly.
“For my essay on the middle class and poverty in China, I used GenAI to scout sources and analyse the assigned article. It gave me ideas and helped me highlight key points. I ended up earning A- for that assignment,” he says.
“I feel guilty sometimes, however. I do half of the thinking, and AI does the rest. But it still feels like my learning is coming entirely from the machine. My creative thinking has definitely weakened,” he says.
Like Lau, Liu is drawn to using AI for better grades and efficiency.
“Doing coursework ourselves surely helps hone our skills, but GenAI boosts my efficiency so much. I can now finish a paper in less than an hour. It used to take me a whole day. Sometimes its ideas are even better than mine. It’s hard to turn the clock back,” the Year 2 student says.
“It saves time and my grades have improved. But I wonder if I’m trading away my ability to think for convenience. That’s what makes me feel stupid, even when I’m doing well in terms of my grades,” he adds.
Chu Ka Hai, a postgraduate student researching artificial intelligence, believes GenAI makes him do less thinking, despite his rich knowledge about technology.
“I used to struggle a lot with long essays. So I turned to AI to help me check grammar and develop my ideas. After that, I couldn’t resist using it anymore,” Chu shares.
“I can’t write grammatically correct paragraphs in English without GenAI now. I tried once doing it on my own, and my draft was full of grammar slips and awkward phrasing. It’s easier to let AI sort it out for me. But that means I’m not really learning English, processing information and forming the structure of a piece of writing myself,” he explains.
Despite the convenience, Chu is aware of the potential risks of the overreliance on GenAI.
“Although I enjoy everything GenAI offers, I worry that we’ll stop using our brains to think and learn. It could be dangerous for humankind and society if people aren’t aware of what’s happening or why, and just keep being fed information by AI,” he adds.
Dr. Kecheng Fang from The Chinese University of Hong Kong says university courses and curriculum need to be redesigned and reimagined. (Photo courtesy of Kecheng, Fang)
Professor Fang Kecheng of the School of Journalism and Communication at The Chinese University of Hong Kong, who researches the role of technologies such as AI in shaping the media landscape, warns heavy reliance on GenAI might disconnect students from the vital experience of learning and intellectual growth.
“Learning should be difficult, and even painful. No pain, no gain. If students avoid this pain by relying on AI, they might lose their interest in any learning and future development opportunities,” he says.
Fang stresses that a university degree is not just about completing assignments or passing exams.
“It should show a student knows how to learn, has been part of a learning community, and can critically reflect on their lives and society,” he says.
With many students feeling their education lacks meaning in today’s AI-driven world, Fang believes it is high time for universities to rethink their educational approach, rediscover humanity by nurturing human creativity, amplify human values, and preserve human spirits.
“Courses need redesigning and curriculums should be reimagined. Students should learn how to work with AI, how to assess AI’s output, and find their uniqueness that cannot be replaced by AI,” he urges.
Edited by Kieon Paek
Sub-edited by Myo Min Htin
