When I first started working with students on college essays, the most common problem I saw wasn’t a lack of talent. It was a lack of trust—in their own stories, their own voice, their own ability to wrestle with the blank page.
Neuroscience shows that the adolescent brain is still under construction well into our early to mid-twenties. The prefrontal cortex—the part responsible for reflection, problem-solving, and future planning—is still wiring itself based on the habits we form today.
Which is why these years matter so much. Every time you sit with an idea, revise your own sentence, or reflect honestly about your growth, you’re not just building a better essay. You’re building a better brain. One that can later use AI, not as a crutch, but as a collaborative tool. One that’s equipped with its own internal voice—what I sometimes call “MeGPT.”
These days, that voice has a tempting alternative: ChatGPT. Gemini. Claude. CoPilot. Jasper. Perplexity. In seconds, it can spin out a grammatically sound, vaguely impressive essay. But there’s a cost. Not just to originality, but to learning itself.
A growing body of research—including a new study from MIT—suggests that using AI too early in the writing process doesn’t just change what students write. It may change how they think, how they remember, and how prepared they are to show up authentically in the admissions process.
What MIT Discovered About ChatGPT and the Brain
In a recent study from MIT’s Media Lab, researchers tracked 54 college-aged participants as they completed writing tasks using four different methods: unaided writing, internet search, ChatGPT, and a mix of those tools. Meanwhile, EEG technology monitored the activity in each participant’s brain.
Here’s what they found:
- Students who used ChatGPT had the lowest neural engagement, particularly in areas linked to memory, attention, and decision-making
- More than 80 percent of AI users couldn’t recall key content from their own essays afterward
- The group that started with their own thinking, then used ChatGPT to revise, showed stronger brain activity and a better sense of ownership over their writing
The researchers described a clear pattern: “Cognitive activity scaled down in relation to external tool use,” and “[large language model] users consistently underperformed at neural, linguistic, and behavioral levels.” In other words, the more students leaned on AI, the less they engaged their own brain.
This isn’t a fear-based take on AI. In fact, the researchers emphasized that tools like ChatGPT can support student learning when used intentionally. But the difference lies in sequencing. Start with your brain, then bring in the bot. Not the other way around.
Why That Matters in the Admissions Process
Let’s be clear: colleges are not anti-technology. But they are looking for writing that reveals reflection, depth, and voice—qualities that templated AI essays often flatten.
According to MIT’s natural language analysis, ChatGPT-generated essays tend to:
- Rely on predictable sentence structures and transitional phrases
- Use generic emotional language (think: “This experience changed me forever”)
- Overemphasize buzzwords and named entities without deeper insight
In short, they may sound polished, but they rarely sound personal.
That’s a red flag in selective admissions. Most elite colleges read thousands of essays a year, and admissions officers are trained to spot essays that feel rehearsed, over-coached, or AI-generated. A recent Cornell study added another layer of concern: ChatGPT-generated content often mimics the linguistic patterns of male, high-income, native-English-speaking applicants. Which means that, far from leveling the playing field, AI may actually dilute the unique voices of students from underrepresented backgrounds.
And institutions are responding. The University of Wisconsin–Madison’s admissions office now explicitly addresses AI and ChatGPT use on its main application page. Their guidance is firm yet fair:
“We strongly discourage students from simply feeding AI a prompt for their essay, as it denies you the opportunity to help us better understand why you want to attend UW–Madison.”
While that’s not a zero‑tolerance policy, it is a clear signal. Schools want honesty, not algorithms. For students already under pressure to sound like the “ideal applicant,” a key question emerges: If your essay doesn’t sound like you, then whose story are you telling?
Even More Research Confirms the Risks
The MIT study doesn’t stand alone. Across multiple disciplines—from education to cognitive neuroscience—the pattern is clear: early or extensive AI use can weaken learning, reduce retention, and harm critical thinking.
In the MIT team’s own words, students using ChatGPT “accumulated cognitive debt,” a term they use to describe the way mental shortcuts taken with AI may appear efficient, but in fact leave lasting gaps in learning and engagement. They found that “LLM users also struggled to accurately quote their own work,” a behavioral marker of shallow processing that persisted across multiple sessions.
The difference between how students used AI also mattered. Those who began with their own ideas and then brought in AI support showed stronger brain activity, especially in memory and attention regions. As the MIT study put it:
“LLM-to-Brain participants showed reduced alpha and beta connectivity, indicating under‑engagement. Brain-to‑LLM users exhibited higher memory recall and activation of occipito‑parietal and prefrontal areas, similar to Search Engine users.”
Worse, students who began relying on AI early had trouble regaining full cognitive engagement even after switching back. The authors observed “lingering suppression of activity” in students who had previously used AI in earlier sessions.
These findings align with broader research:
- A 2023 systematic review found that AI dialogue systems significantly impair reasoning and analytical ability when they replace human effort—introducing what the authors call “metacognitive laziness.”
- A mixed-methods study of 666 participants found a strong negative correlation (r = –0.68) between heavy AI use and critical-thinking performance.
- A 2023 test-prep study reported that AI users scored 6.7 points lower on average—high-performers suffered most.
- A 2023 comprehension experiment showed full reliance on AI-generated materials led to a 25 percent drop in retention; partial AI use resulted in a 12 percent decline.
It’s not just data; teachers are feeling it too. A growing number of educators report shifting to in-class writing and oral exams to preserve cognitive rigor.
Still, not all AI use is harmful. A 2024 meta-analysis found that, with careful scaffolding, tools like ChatGPT can support improved learning outcomes. A 2024 PNAS study also showed that students who critically engaged with AI—asking questions, editing ideas, and revising thoughtfully—performed better and reported less mental fatigue.
This confirms what many educators already believe: the tool isn’t the problem. The process is.
A Better Way: Brain First, AI Second
Now for the good news. Used well, AI can absolutely support student writing. But it works best as a tool for refinement—not replacement.
The most promising result in the MIT study came from a crossover group who began by writing independently, then used ChatGPT in a second round of revisions. These students showed a marked improvement in both brain activity and perceived ownership. Their essays weren’t just better—they were more theirs.
That aligns with the PNAS study, which found that students who practiced with AI examples after brainstorming performed better on writing assessments and experienced less cognitive strain. The key is thoughtful sequencing.
A more effective workflow might look like this:
- Reflect first: Journal, voice-note, or mind map your experiences before touching a keyboard
- Write a rough draft: Don’t worry about polish. Worry about meaning
- Use ChatGPT as a tool: Ask it to clarify a confusing sentence, suggest more vivid verbs, or flag awkward transitions—but don’t let it take the driver’s seat
- Reclaim your voice: Read your essay aloud. If it doesn’t sound like something you’d say in conversation, revise until it does
This is the same approach I use when writing many of the blogs you read here at InGenius Prep. I always begin with my own reflections—my stories, my ideas, my questions. Only after that do I invite ChatGPT (or sometimes Google’s Gemini) into the process. Sometimes it acts like a colleague, helping me reframe a sentence I’ve been circling for hours. Other times it’s more like a critic, catching inconsistencies or formatting errors I’ve missed. And sometimes it’s just a gentle sounding board for something I already knew in my heart but needed help expressing more clearly.
Used that way, AI doesn’t replace your voice. It supports it.
Why This Matters at InGenius Prep
At InGenius Prep, we work with students from around the world—some who grew up speaking three languages, some who’ve faced systemic barriers, and others who are still figuring out what they want from life. What unites our best students isn’t perfection. It’s reflection.
We’ve seen students write essays that made admissions officers cry, laugh, and pause mid-read because it was that real. And those essays? They started from within. No prompt could have produced them.
That’s what we help students do. We don’t just edit grammar. We coach clarity, voice, and self-awareness—skills that matter far beyond a single application.
Quick Self-Check: Are You Overusing AI?
If you’re working on your personal statement right now, ask yourself:
- Did I begin this process with my own ideas, or with a prompt to ChatGPT?
- Can I explain what my essay is about without re-reading it?
- Do my friends or parents recognize me in this draft?
- Is the voice in this essay mine, or something I’m performing?
If you’re unsure, that’s okay. A great essay doesn’t come from sounding perfect. It comes from sounding real.
Let’s Build Your Story Together
If you’re looking for a partner to help you write something reflective, memorable, and uniquely you, we’d love to meet you. Our counselors, editors, and coaches work with students at every stage of the process to craft essays that colleges remember—and students feel proud of.