Is Using AI Cheating? How Schools Should Handle AI in Education

A child who was supposed to be working through their summer homework turns out to be copying an AI's answers straight off the screen. At that moment, one word may come to mind: cheating.

Before answering that question, though, we first need to sort out what homework is actually for.

Japan's Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT) published guidelines on generative AI use in schools in July 2023, later revised in December 2024. What those guidelines explicitly label as "inappropriate" is submitting AI-generated content directly as one's own work in competitions, and letting students use generative AI in exams and quizzes — not using AI in general.

The Real Problem Is Skipping the Thinking Process

When a student uses AI to produce a homework answer and copies it down, the problem is not the tool — it is the absence of thinking. The same issue arises when students copy answers directly from a textbook solution guide. The relevant question is whether the child understood the reasoning, not which tool was involved. Conversely, if a child reads an AI-generated answer, checks whether it is accurate, and rewrites it in their own words, that is a genuine learning process. Osaka University's Center for Teaching and Learning Support has published classroom examples where AI responses containing errors are used as teaching material, training students to fact-check what they receive.

Teachers Need to Redesign the Question

In an environment where AI is available, keeping "cheating" from occurring also requires rethinking how assignments are framed. A prompt such as "explain this concept" can be answered in seconds by any generative AI. But "describe where your initial understanding differed from the AI's explanation" or "identify what the AI's answer missed and add your own perspective" makes it structurally impossible to simply paste an AI output. Since 2024, a number of Japanese middle schools have reported piloting assignments built around "critiquing AI answers" or "comparing AI output with your own thinking."

What Parents Can Do at Home

Blanket bans on AI use at home are neither realistic nor particularly effective. A more productive habit is reviewing how a child used AI after the fact. Simply asking "Was there anything in what the AI said that seemed off to you?" gives children practice in reading information critically. Teaching children that AI is not a source of guaranteed accuracy, but a scaffold for thinking, is the most important literacy lesson parents can provide at home.

Building the Skill to Learn With AI

The equation "using AI = cheating" mirrors the argument made when calculators became widespread: "using a calculator = a child who can't do arithmetic." What actually matters is how deeply children can think while using the tool.

At Digital Kodomo BASE in Ota Ward, Tokyo, we offer free hands-on programs where children work with computers and AI directly — building the habit of not accepting AI answers at face value and testing claims for themselves. The right relationship with AI is learned through experience, not prohibition.