Education
March 02, 2026
AI and professional training
Between efficiency, dependency, and responsibility

Artificial intelligence (AI) is no longer a technological promise and has become a concrete part of educational and organizational practices, transforming how professionals are trained, learn, and operate. According to a report by the Digital Education Council, published in 2025, 88% of the institutions investigated used AI minimally or moderately in teaching processes, and 75% used it for the creation of teaching material.
The applicability of artificial intelligence is already concretely reflected in the organizational environment. Data from the McKinsey Global Survey on the State of AI 2025 indicate that 88% of organizations use AI regularly in at least one business function, covering activities such as automation, process optimization, and decision support, demonstrating that the technology is no longer experimental and has become part of operational practices. However, it is crucial to analyze how this same technology can negatively impact the training of future IT professionals.
AI is a tool with immense potential to assist students and teachers in the learning process. Adaptive learning platforms, virtual tutors, and intelligent assistants facilitate access to knowledge and personalize the pace of learning. On the other hand, recent studies indicate that the recurrent use of generative AI tools can reduce cognitive engagement in complex activities.
Research presented at CHI 2025 by Lee et al., based on a survey of 319 professionals and 936 real-world examples of AI use at work, shows that higher levels of trust in systems are statistically associated with less cognitive effort and lower activation of critical thinking.
The authors also observed a shift in the professional’s role, moving from execution to the simple supervision of automated responses, increasing the risk of technological dependency and weakening the capacity for independent problem-solving over time.
One of the main concerns refers to the risk of superficiality in learning associated with the recurrent use of generative AI tools. Fan, L.; Deng, K.; Liu conducted a study in 2025 with 148 engineering students from China which showed that, although 88.52% of participants reported increased study efficiency, almost half stated that their academic performance remained practically unchanged.
The authors observe that the sense of productivity generated by task automation can mask gaps in conceptual understanding, creating a perception of learning detached from effective knowledge acquisition.
Furthermore, some students reported a reduction in cognitive autonomy, indicating that dependence on automated responses may lead to neglect of fundamental steps in the formative process and limit the development of logical reasoning and independent problem-solving. This can culminate in a generation of professionals highly dependent on technology and with worrying technical fragilities.
Another delicate point refers to the impact of AI on student engagement and motivation. A systematic review published in 2025 in the journal Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, conducted by Heung and Chiu, with a meta-analysis involving 17 empirical studies and 1,735 participants, showed that, although activities mediated by ChatGPT present an average increase in general engagement levels, the cognitive effects are inconsistent, especially in tasks that require deep understanding, writing, and programming.
The authors highlight that some students tend to resort to the system to complete activities more quickly, which can reduce engagement with complex cognitive processes. Furthermore, the study identifies recurring practices of copying and pasting AI-generated code or answers, associated with dependency behaviors and the decrease in active participation in challenging tasks, indicating risks of superficial learning when there is no adequate pedagogical mediation. This not only harms individual learning but also weakens the market, which needs innovative, curious professionals prepared to solve unprecedented problems.
In the labor market, the expansion of AI is already producing concrete effects on the organization of professional activities. Returning to the McKinsey Global Survey – The State of AI 2025, the study showed reductions in cost, especially reported in areas such as software engineering, manufacturing, and information technology.
Furthermore, it pointed out that 32% of respondents expected a reduction in the size of their organizations’ workforce in the following year, as a result of AI. This data suggests that automation tends to replace routine and repetitive tasks, as well as reconfigure the profile of demanded skills.
Thus, a formative paradox arises: while technology demands greater technical sophistication and adaptability, part of the area’s traditional activities are being absorbed by automated systems. Furthermore, the ethical dimension and social responsibility associated with technological development cannot be downplayed in professional training.
Risks
The Recommendation on the Ethics of Artificial Intelligence, adopted by Unesco in 2021, highlights that AI systems involve risks related to algorithmic bias, discrimination, data protection, and broad social impacts, requiring responsible governance and qualified human supervision.
In this context, training in technology cannot be restricted to the instrumental domain of tools, but must incorporate critical reflection on the social, legal, and moral consequences of applying these systems. The risk is to train professionals who are technically capable but detached from ethical reflection, which can result in problematic and even dangerous solutions for society.
Another challenge refers to the structural inequality of access to digital technologies. According to data published by the International Telecommunication Union in 2025, although 74% of the world’s population is connected, about 2.2 billion people remain off-line, concentrated mainly in low- and middle-income countries. While high-income nations are approaching universal access, only 23% of the population in low-income countries uses the internet.
Furthermore, a significant difference persists between urban and rural areas, with 85% of urban inhabitants connected, compared to 58% of the rural population. Thus, the expansion of AI tends to unequally benefit different social groups, leaving students and future professionals without regular access to connectivity, digital devices and tools, and reinforcing regional inequalities.
Finally, the growing reliance on AI systems can influence how professionals handle complex and unforeseen situations. In a study presented at CHI 2025 on the use of generative AI in cognitive activities, Lee and colleagues showed that recurrent delegation of decisions to the system is associated with reduced analytical effort and the transfer of the human role from execution to supervision. The authors warn that this pattern may weaken independent problem-solving over time.
In professional contexts, this process tends to reduce exposure to open challenges, which can contribute to limitations in improvisation, autonomy, and capacity for adaptation, essential skills in the face of crisis scenarios and technological unpredictability. Therefore, although AI represents a relevant ally, it is crucial that educators, students, and professionals are aware of its limits and risks. Contemporary training must seek balance between the use of artificial intelligence as a tool and the strengthening of essential human competencies, such as critical thinking, autonomy, creativity, and ethical responsibility. The future of technologies depends directly on the quality of this human formation. When used only as a shortcut, AI can weaken the foundation of learning and innovation; when integrated consciously and critically, it can enhance human capabilities and contribute to a more just, sustainable, and socially responsible development.
Who wrote this column
Maurício Acconcia Dias








