Beyond Prompting: Biological Memory, Cognitive Offloading, and Human Expertise in the Age of GenAI
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.55578/fepr.2607.009Keywords:
Generative artificial intelligence, cognitive offloading, biological memory, higher education, human expertise, cognitive declineAbstract
Generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) is driving unprecedented changes in higher education by enabling students to outsource complex cognitive tasks, including writing, summarisation, reasoning, and problem-solving. While these technologies offer accessibility, personalisation, and educational support, they raise concerns regarding cognitive offloading, eroding biological memory, and development of human expertise. This paper argues that prompting AI systems should not be conflated with learning because expertise depends upon durable internal cognitive structures developed through encoding, retrieval, schema formation, and critical reflective reasoning over time. Drawing upon cognitive psychology, educational neuroscience, and contemporary AI research, the paper introduces the concept of biological memory as the foundation of independent professional judgment and adaptive expertise. Excessive reliance on GenAI may without careful management contribute to cognitive debt, reduced neural engagement and cognitive decline. The paper proposes brain-aligned approaches to curriculum, assessment, AI literacy, and educational design that position AI as a scaffold for cognition rather than a substitute for it.
References
1. Aydin M. O., Vatansever A., & Erer Kafa S. (2026). From hallucination to precision: A longitudinal analysis of reference accuracy and plagiarism in AI-generated medical literature (2024–2026). Journal of Uludağ University Medical Faculty, *52*, 1870116. DOI: 10.32708/uutfd.1870116
2. Jha M., & Atif A. (2025). Reimagining pedagogy for the GenAI era: Frameworks, challenges and institutional strategies. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, *41*(5), 18. DOI: https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.10645
3. Shao A. (2025). New sources of inaccuracy? A conceptual framework for AI hallucinations and misinformation. Retrieved May 6, 2026, from https://misinforeview.hks.harvard.edu/article/new-sources-of-inaccuracy-a-conceptual-framework-for-studying-ai-hallucinations
4. Purnell K. (2026a). AI's secrets: What students and educators need to know about chatbots. Zenodo. Retrieved May 8, 2026, from https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18452250
5. Kutty S., Chugh R., Li L., Govin-vel S., Perera P., Neupane A., & Jha M. (2025). Authenticity, integrity, and AI: Navigating ethical uncertainty in student assessment. Paper presented at ASCILITE 2025, Adelaide Convention Centre, Adelaide, Australia.
6. Purnell K. (2026b). They look like glasses. They can pass your exam for you. Retrieved May 8, 2026, from https://www.cqu.edu.au/news/1274382/smart-glasses-make-students-better-cheats--but-poorer-learners
7. Gordon E., Palmer D., & Clarke A. (2026). A total brain framework for AGI. Total Brain, a SonderMind company. Retrieved May 10, 2026, from https://totalbraindatabase.com/download/ai-paper
8. LeCun Y. (2022). A path towards autonomous machine intelligence. OpenReview. Retrieved May 9, 2026, from https://openreview.net/pdf?id=BZ5a1r-kVsf
9. Earp J. (2025). Teacher exclusive: Podcast special with Estonian Education Minister Dr Kristina Kallas. Retrieved May 7, 2026, from https://www.teachermagazine.com/au_en/articles/teacher-exclusive-podcast-special-with-estonian-education-minister-dr-kristina-kallas
10. Kosmyna N., Hauptmann E., Yuan Y. T., Situ J., Liao X.-H., Beresnitzky A. V., Braunstein I., & Maes P. (2025). Your brain on ChatGPT: Accumulation of cognitive debt when using an AI assistant for essay writing tasks. arXiv preprint arXiv:2505.05523. DOI: 10.48550/arXiv.2506.08872
11. Poquet O., & de Laat M. (2021). Developing capabilities: Lifelong learning in the age of AI. British Journal of Educational Technology, *52*(4), 1695-1708. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13123
12. Yadav P. S. (2026). AI & The Future of Expertise. In The AI Competency Paradox: Why AI Doesn't Replace Jobs, but Reshapes Organizational Competence (pp. 221-236). Springer Nature Switzerland. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-032-11748-9_10
13. Zhan Y., Boud D., Dawson P., & Yan Z. (2025). Generative artificial intelligence as an enabler of student feedback engagement: a framework. Higher Education Research & Development, *44*(5), 1289-1304. DOI: 10.1080/07294360.2025.2476513
14. Zhai C., Wibowo S., & Li L. D. (2024). The effects of over-reliance on AI dialogue systems on students' cognitive abilities: a systematic review. Smart Learning Environment, *11*, 28. DOI: 10.1186/s40561-024-00316-7
15. Purnell K. (2026c). Cognitive load theory informed by educational neuroscience and artificial intelligence: Implications for preservice teachers and teacher educators. Zenodo. Retrieved May 8, 2026, from https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18370535
16. Cowan N. (2014). Working memory underpins cognitive development, learning, and education. Educational Psychology Review, *26*(2). DOI: 10.1007/s10648-013-9246-y
17. Sweller J. (1994). Cognitive load theory, learning difficulty, and instructional design. Learning and Instruction, *4*(4), 295-312. DOI: 10.1016/0959-4752(94)90003-5
18. Yan L., Greiff S., Teuber Z., & Gašević D. (2024). Promises and challenges of generative artificial intelligence for human learning. Nature Human Behaviour, *8*(10), 1839-1850. DOI: 10.1038/s41562-024-02004-5
19. Balart T., Díaz B., & Shryock K. (2026). A Systematic Literature Review on the Pedagogical Implications and Impact of GenAI on Students' Critical Thinking. Algorithms, *19*(3), 179. DOI: 10.3390/a19030179
20. Baradari D., Kosmyna N., Petrov O., Kaplun R., & Maes P. (2025). NeuroChat: A neuroadaptive AI chatbot for customizing learning experiences. arXiv. https://arxiv.org/abs/2503.07599
21. Roberts P. (2026). Digital classrooms may be failing students: Experts call for a rethink. CQUniversity Australia. Retrieved May 8, 2026, from https://www.cqu.edu.au/news/1269203/cqu-experts-call-for-rethink-of-classroom-technology-as-student-outcomes-decline
22. Jha M., Jha S., Holmes A. M., Smith B., Murphy B., Kansal M., & Pidgeon D. (2025). Integrating generative Artificial Intelligence across the curriculum in higher education: Multi-disciplinary case studies. Journal of Education, Innovation and Communication, *7*(2), 22. DOI: https://search.informit.org/doi/10.3316/informit.T2025072600000791465164475
23. Tankelevitch L., Kewenig V., Simkute A., Scott A. E., Sarkar A., Sellen A., & Rintel S. (2024). The Metacognitive Demands and Opportunities of Generative AI. In Proceedings of the 2024 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Honolulu, HI, USA. DOI: 10.1145/3613904.3642902
24. Risko E. F., & Gilbert S. J. (2016). Cognitive offloading. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, *20*(9), 676-688. DOI: 10.1016/j.tics.2016.07.002
25. Dror I. E., & Harnad S. (2008). Cognition Distributed. John Benjamins Publishing. DOI: 10.1075/bct.16
26. Skulmowski A. (2023). The cognitive architecture of digital externalization. Educational Psychology Review, *35*(4), 101. DOI: 10.1007/s10648-023-09818-1
27. de Aldama C. (2020). Cognitive enhancement or cognitive diminishing? Digital technologies and challenges for education from a situated perspective. Límite Arica, *73*. https://revistalimite.uta.cl/index.php/limite/article/view/233
28. Gumber N. (2026). The Cognitive Cost of Artificial Intelligence: A Neurocognitive Review. International Journal of Global Mental Health, Innovation, Policy, Action, Culture & Transformation, *2*(1). DOI: 10.61113/impact.V2I1.1239
29. Pyke A. A., & LeFevre J. A. (2011). Calculator use need not undermine direct-access ability: The roles of retrieval, calculation, and calculator use in the acquisition of arithmetic facts. Journal of Educational Psychology, *103*(3), 607. DOI: 10.1037/a0023291
30. An T. (2025). AI as Cognitive Amplifier: Rethinking Human Judgment in the Age of GenAI. arXiv preprint arXiv:2512.10961. DOI: 10.48550/arXiv.2512.10961
31. Eraut M. (2002). Developing professional knowledge and competence. Routledge.
32. Elim E. H. S. Y. (2026). Promoting cognitive skills in AI-supported learning environments: the integration of bloom's taxonomy. Education 3-13, *54*(3), 612-622. DOI: 10.1080/03004279.2024.2332469
33. Sweller J. (2020). Cognitive load theory and educational technology. Educational Technology Research and Development, *68*(1), 1-16. https://www.jstor.org/stable/48727426
34. Agirdag O. (2026). Beyond prompt engineering: Prompting literacy, linguistic capital, and educational inequality. Educational Theory, *76*(2), 206-223. DOI: 10.1111/edth.70057
35. Walter Y. (2024). Embracing the future of Artificial Intelligence in the classroom: the relevance of AI literacy, prompt engineering, and critical thinking in modern education. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, *21*(1), 15. DOI: 10.1186/s41239-024-00448-3
36. Wood R., Baxter P., & Belpaeme T. (2012). A review of long-term memory in natural and synthetic systems. Adaptive Behavior, *20*(2), 81-103. DOI: 10.1177/1059712311421219
37. Terry W. S. (2017). Learning and memory: Basic principles, processes, and procedures (1st ed.). Routledge.
38. Ericsson A., & Pool R. (2016). Peak: Secrets from the new science of expertise. Random House.
39. Tyng C. M., Amin H. U., Saad M. N. M., & Malik A. S. (2017). The influences of emotion on learning and memory. Frontiers in Psychology, *8*, 1454. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01454
40. Karpicke J. D., & Blunt J. R. (2011). Retrieval practice produces more learning than elaborative studying with concept mapping. Science, *331*(6018), 772-775. DOI: 10.1126/science.1199327
41. Linden K., Hachem H.-H., & Kondyli V. (2025). Homo Promptus: Predicting the impact of generative AI on human memory and creativity. Memory, Mind & Media, *4*, e15. DOI: 10.1017/mem.2025.10012
42. Andreas J. (2025). Beyond world models: Rethinking understanding in AI models. arXiv:2511.12239v1. DOI: arxiv.org/html/2511.12239v1
43. Winiarczyk J., Dąbrowska K., Lenkiewicz E., Żak J., Rybka Z., Trynkiewicz W., Kaczor M., Maciejewska A., Omiecińska M., & Stępińska M. (2026). Memeory support technologies in the age of artificial intelligence: Cognitive offloading, societal implications, and conditions for resposible implementation. International Journal of Innovative Technologies in Social Science, *1*(2), 50. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31435/ijitss.2(50).2026.5257
44. Hooper V. J. (2025). Cognitive offloading and the reshaping of human thought: The subtle influence of Artificial Intelligence. Colloquia, academic journal of culture and thought, *12*, 1-14. DOI: 10.31207/colloquia.v12i1.185
45. Stankovic M., Hirche E., Kollatzsch S., & Doetsch J. N. (2025). Comment on: Your Brain on ChatGPT: Accumulation of cognitive debt when using an AI assistant for essay writing tasks. arXiv. https://arxiv.org/abs/2601.00856
46. Georgiou G. P. (2025). ChatGPT produces more "lazy" thinkers: Evidence of cognitive engagement decline. arXiv preprint arXiv:2505.05523. https://arxiv.org/abs/2507.00181
47. Agarwal P. K., & Bain P. M. (2019). Energize Learning with Spacing and Interleaving. In Powerful Teaching (pp. 93-121). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119549031.ch4
48. Swiecki et al., (2022). Assessment in the age of artificial intelligence. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 3(2022), 100075, 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2022.100075
49. Luckin, et al., (2022). AI for School Teachers. AI for everything Series, CRC Press, Taylor and Francis Group. Retrieved July 1, 2026, frrom https://newteacherlibraryandtools.square.site/uploads/b/e4443390-f724-11ec-9291-b5b724deb1dc/AI%20for%20School%20Teachers%20(Rose%20Luckin%20%20Karine%20George%20%20Mutlu%20Cukurova)%20(Z-Library).pdf
50. OECD. (2025). Artificial intelligence and the future of skills. OECD Publishing. Retrieved June 7, 2026, from https://www.oecd.org/en/about/projects/artificial-intelligence-and-future-of-skills.html
51. UNESCO. (2025). Guidance for GenAI in education and research. UNESCO Publishing. Retrieved June 10, 2026, from https://www.unesco.org/en/articles/unesco-governments-must-quickly-regulate-generative-ai-schools?hub=83250
52. Loreto I. D. (2025). The Death of Cognitive Conflict? AI, Learning, and the Case for Disruptive Pedagogy. Interaction Design and Architecture(s) Journal - IxD&A, *67*, 10-23. DOI: 10.55612/s-5002-067-001
Downloads
Published
Data Availability Statement
No new data were generated or analyzed in this study.
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Meena Jha, Stephen Colbran, Ken Purnell (Author)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.