CR’s September 18, 2026 Times Standard Article: Preventing the Deterioration in Critical Thinking at CR

Published on Sep 15 2026

I have discussed the importance of critical thinking in this column often. It is one of the most important contributions higher education makes to society – teaching students how to use their minds to discover answers to big questions or to decide how they really feel about pressing issues. I believe that we become more authentically ourselves when we are asked to really think about how we comprehend the world, examine our long-held beliefs, ethics, and morals, and use critical thinking skills to discover what side of a matter we will come down on. 

Several weeks ago, during a panel discussion with community members, I was asked about the impact of artificial intelligence on education. I shared my opinion that artificial intelligence represents an interesting combination of opportunity and uncertainty for higher education. AI raises fundamental questions about academic integrity, equity, privacy, and institutional responsibility. It is also something we must face rationally based on evidence and not speculation or fear-based narratives. 

But rather than stop there, I went on to say that, if we are not careful, artificial intelligence has the potential to contribute to a deterioration in critical thinking skills, which in turn can lead to the “dumbing down” of America. With the proliferation of Large Language Models (LLMS) like Claude and ChatGPT, we are seeing an alarming trend in what researchers are calling “cognitive offloading”, defined as “moving mental tasks - like remembering facts, organizing thoughts, or solving problems - to an external tool.”

Cognitive offloading is not new. We have all done it, often without really knowing that we are doing it. When we use technology to make a record of something that we want to retain or recall later, take notes in class or in meetings, or make grocery lists we are cognitively offloading.  The core difference is that the latter offloads memory, while LLMs offload the processing and generation of ideas.

Just last week, whistleblowers, as well as the leaders of the biggest AI companies in America, issued extreme warnings about the pace and development of AI models. Their concern is that a day will come when an AI system will be able to advance itself without requiring human researchers.  Even so, this column is not anti-artificial intelligence. I had not, until recently believed the extremists who claim that artificial intelligence is evil and intent on destroying us like the villains in the Terminator movies. I know that for generations, America has produced great innovators, inventors, and writers who have built tools that advanced society and contributed to the making of the country. Artificial intelligence is also a tool, albeit a very powerful one. AI can help reduce barriers related to language, disability, time, geography, confidence, and prior educational opportunity.  It also poses one of the great challenges for educators and one that, quite honestly, no one has a good solution for yet. 

Right now, our faculty feel overwhelmed by the rapid use of AI, uncertain about its accuracy, and questioning whether artificial intelligence can improve instruction. As educators, we are concerned that generative artificial intelligence can, if allowed to proliferate through College of the Redwoods unimpeded, lead to extreme cognitive offloading, as students replace their own thinking with technology, which in turn leads to an intellectual decline or atrophy. Or, as one of my colleagues described it, “technology-induced dementia.” 

A new Brookings Institution report aptly called, Do AI’s risks outweigh the benefits for students and schools? has found that “when kids use generative AI that tells them what the answer is…they are not thinking for themselves. They’re not learning to parse truth from fiction…. They’re not learning about different perspectives in the world because they’re actually not engaging in the material.” It reports further that we are “already seeing declines in content knowledge, critical thinking, and even creativity”. 

Similarly, Dr. Sebastian Ocklenburg, in his February 2026 article Cognitive Offloading: Using AI Reduces New Skill Formation, claimed that students who rely on artificial intelligence do not learn as much as students who do not. He went on to argue that while it would be advantageous for students to be able to use AI tools proficiently for the future job market, students should first learn basic skills and AI tools should only be introduced into the learning process once a good level of proficiency has been reached. 

This is the dilemma we face, how to prepare students for a world where AI has proliferated, while also avoiding the intellectual risk that these tools present. It is profoundly clear that we need to do something. There are deep and lasting consequences for our communities and the world if we allow the next generation to offload their reason, judgement, and thinking onto AI.

So, rather than wait or rely on an external body to dictate how we use AI tools, CR is taking the bold step to develop innovative guidelines and policies that will steer the responsible and appropriate use of artificial intelligence in our curriculum and administrative operations. We are committed to providing a high-quality education that leverages artificial intelligence while protecting and centering human agency.