UNICEF-felmérés: a gyerekek háromszor gyorsabban fogadják el az AI-t

An entire generation is growing up using something that, until recently, did not exist: children and adolescents converse, learn, create, and seek advice (and even comfort) from artificial intelligence systems that respond almost instantaneously and with a surprising appearance of security. This is not a futuristic prediction. It is happening now. UNICEF (2026) warns that children are adopting artificial intelligence technologies more than three times faster than adults. Based on representative surveys conducted in ten countries, including Mexico, the agency estimates that at least 20 million children and adolescents aged 12 to 17 have used AI. Approximately 13 million reported using it to support their learning and schoolwork. However, another, more disturbing statistic is that more than two million, about one in ten, said they turn to AI for advice on matters that concern them (UNICEF, 2026). This is where the nature of the debate changes. We are no longer just talking about a student using a chatbot to solve math problems faster. Now our discussion includes adolescents who share their fears, doubts, or personal problems with a machine before discussing such things with their parents, teachers, or friends. UNICEF (2026) summarizes it clearly: artificial intelligence is already part of our lives and is transforming childhood worldwide, for better or worse. The problem is that its adoption is outpacing the rules, research, and protection mechanisms designed specifically for minors. It would be a mistake to present artificial intelligence solely as a threat. Used well, it can become an extraordinary educational tool. It can explain a concept multiple times without losing patience, adapt exercises to the student’s level, translate content, provide immediate feedback, stimulate creativity, and expand access to knowledge, among many other examples The Brookings Institution specifically recognizes this potential. Well-designed AI tools can enrich learning when they are part of a solid pedagogical strategy. The problem arises when they stop being instruments for learning and become substitutes for the learning process (Burns et al., 2026). The difference may seem small, but it is fundamental: Asking AI to “help me understand this problem” is different from telling it to “solve it for me.” The PISA 2025 results raise an important red flag. More than 760,000 15-year-old students from 91 countries and economies participated in the assessment. For the first time, PISA thoroughly analyzed how students use digital tools and artificial intelligence to learn (OECD, 2026). The results do not justify claiming that AI, on its own, causes lower academic performance. These are mainly associations, and the patterns depend on how the technology is used. However, the signal is strong enough to warrant attention: students who use AI tools more frequently for particular academic tasks tend to show less favorable educational outcomes than those who use them less or differently (OECD, 2026). Andreas Schleicher, Director of Education and Skills at the OECD, uses a powerful analogy: just as no one improves their physical condition simply by watching sports, learning does not happen by consuming answers, but through the cognitive effort of engaging with new material. The OECD (2026) calls this process the productive cognitive struggle: this occurs when we try to understand, connect ideas, make mistakes, correct ourselves, and finally solve a problem. Precisely therein lies one of the greatest educational risks of AI. When technology strengthens that effort, it can scaffold learning. When it eliminates it, it becomes a crutch. Thus, a generation that systematically learns while avoiding intellectual effort could develop an enormous capacity to obtain answers and, paradoxically, a diminished capacity to construct them. Artificial intelligence has one particularly seductive characteristic: it responds fluently. An answer can be wrong and yet s