ChatGPT is quietly replacing peer support in college classrooms

Students who used to rely on friends for shared struggles and collaborative problem-solving now find themselves isolated. The study revealed a growing sense of demotivation and disconnection, especially among students who valued camaraderie and mutual support as part of their educational journey. While generative AI can efficiently provide solutions, it does not replace the reassurance, encouragement, and shared effort that come with human collaboration.

While generative AI tools like ChatGPT have brought personalized instruction and debugging assistance to the fingertips of students, a new study reveals these same tools may be weakening the social bonds essential to meaningful learning. Titled “All Roads Lead to ChatGPT”: How Generative AI Is Eroding Social Interactions and Student Learning Communities, the study interviewed undergraduate computing students across seven North American universities and discovered that AI tools are fundamentally altering help-seeking behaviors, replacing peer collaboration with isolated, AI-mediated interactions.

The findings paint a nuanced but concerning picture of academic life in the era of generative AI. Rather than collaborating with peers or asking instructors for guidance, students are increasingly turning to AI for support. This shift, the study warns, is gradually eroding the sense of community that underpins classroom learning, mentorship, and student motivation. Even students who avoid AI tools report feeling the effects, as help-seeking is redirected through generative models by others. What was once a socially embedded learning experience is becoming a solitary exchange between student and machine.

How is AI replacing peer support and reshaping classroom dynamics?

One of the study’s most striking findings is the degree to which generative AI tools have become intermediaries in help-seeking. Many students recounted situations where peers no longer offered assistance directly, but instead passed along AI-generated responses or advised others to use ChatGPT. This redirection was reported even by students who did not use AI themselves. For some, the reliance on AI was so pervasive that they described it as “inevitable,” with one student stating that even help from a peer “probably came from ChatGPT.” Another student called the change a “culture shock,” having left school and returned to find the classroom dynamic irrevocably altered.

This shift isn’t only procedural - it’s emotional. Students who used to rely on friends for shared struggles and collaborative problem-solving now find themselves isolated. The study revealed a growing sense of demotivation and disconnection, especially among students who valued camaraderie and mutual support as part of their educational journey. While generative AI can efficiently provide solutions, it does not replace the reassurance, encouragement, and shared effort that come with human collaboration.

The impact is especially significant among senior students, who observed that younger peers now bypass traditional help-seeking pathways. Mentorship, once informally cultivated through peer interaction, is beginning to disappear. The researchers point out that this weakening of informal learning networks threatens students’ access to what is known as the “hidden curriculum” - the unwritten strategies and cultural knowledge that help students navigate academic and professional spaces.

What social and emotional costs are emerging from AI dependence?

Alongside the practical changes, the study uncovered widespread emotional ambivalence about AI use. Despite the normalization of generative tools, seven of the 17 students interviewed expressed feelings of shame or stigma about using AI, particularly in front of peers or professors. Many worried about being judged as lazy or incompetent, even when AI use was permitted by instructors. This led to an unspoken code of private reliance and public concealment—students use generative AI at home but avoid mentioning it in class.

Some students feared being perceived as less intelligent for relying on AI tools, while others hesitated to use them in live classroom settings due to concerns about academic integrity. This stigma was especially acute when AI tools were used around strangers or authority figures. The result is a paradoxical situation where AI is used frequently but rarely acknowledged, complicating efforts to create open, honest conversations around digital learning practices.

This tension is compounded by emotional isolation. Several students reported that overuse of AI reduced their motivation to engage in programming or computing. One student explained that the joy of “grinding it out” with friends had been replaced by solitary work with ChatGPT. Another described how the sense of community in class Discord channels diminished as students stopped asking each other questions, opting instead for AI-generated solutions.

These findings carry implications for student retention and well-being. Collaborative learning has long been associated with greater persistence, especially for underrepresented students who benefit most from social support. As AI disrupts those networks, institutions may need to rethink how they design collaborative experiences and foster student belonging in digital-first learning environments.

What does the study recommend for safeguarding learning communities?

The authors argue that while AI offers undeniable benefits, speed, accessibility, and reduced help-seeking anxiety, it must be integrated carefully to preserve the social aspects of learning. Their data suggest that students are not only losing access to mentorship and peer support but also missing out on broader discussions, multiple perspectives, and critical discourse that come from engaging with other humans.

Students interviewed expressed concern that ChatGPT and similar tools were contributing to a homogenization of thought. Unlike human peers who offer diverse problem-solving styles, described metaphorically as “handwriting” compared to AI’s “Times New Roman”, AI tends to deliver standardized, context-less responses. This flattening effect, some students noted, can stifle creativity and reduce critical thinking.

Additionally, students described genAI tools as reducing opportunities for accidental learning, insights that emerge spontaneously in conversation with peers or instructors. They noted that these organic moments often provide valuable connections between concepts or unexpected learning directions that AI cannot replicate.

The study urges educators and institutions to actively work to preserve and foster peer interactions, mentorship opportunities, and learning communities. This may include designing structured collaborative activities, creating norms for AI use that emphasize transparency, and building intentional spaces for social engagement.