AI Era Sees Rise in 'Skim-Reading Epidemic' Among Vietnamese Students

The findings highlight a steep rise in “rush-reading” syndrome, where students respond hastily with inaccurate answers. Performance drops most sharply during tasks requiring long-form text analysis. Reading comprehension forms the foundation of all academic disciplines. In an era dominated by artificial intelligence, evaluating information and applying critical thinking to reading material has become vital, observed Associate Professor Nguyen Mai Hoa of the School of Education at the University of New South Wales in Australia. The PISA 2025 assessment, published by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), evaluated 760,000 15-year-old students across 91 countries and economies in mathematics and reading literacy. The report revealed that roughly 59% of Vietnamese students cannot apply reading comprehension to solve real-world problems at Level 2 or above, compared to an OECD average of 31%. Under PISA criteria, reading proficiency goes far beyond scanning a passage for quick answers. It demands acquiring, analyzing, evaluating, and applying information across diverse text formats to learn, solve problems, and make sound decisions. Advanced comprehension in digital spaces requires cross-referencing multiple sources, navigating counter-intuitive concepts, and separating verifiable facts from subjective claims. While the OECD identified household factors such as parental engagement and home reading habits, educators point to a fundamental shift in how young minds consume daily information. Dr. Dang Quang Vinh of the British University Vietnam noted that growing up on short-form video algorithms trains youth to consume fragmented, constantly shifting data. When knowledge is compressed into catchy headlines, bullet points, and ready-made answers, the patience required to trace complex arguments and synthesize ideas erodes quickly. Taking the analysis further, Associate Professor Nguyen Van Thang Long of RMIT University Vietnam cautioned against blaming short-form video entirely. The format itself serves as a dynamic communications tool for introducing scientific concepts and vocabulary. Many educators use short clips as gateways to spark curiosity, directing students toward comprehensive books or longer courses. The core challenge stems from platform design. Algorithmic feeds rely on endless scrolling, rapid scene cuts, and instant topic shifts. This digital environment conditions the human brain to seek perpetual novelty at high speed. Applying psychologist Daniel Kahneman’s dual-system framework, System 1 processes information rapidly using intuition and established heuristics. System 2 operates slowly, requiring deliberate effort to dissect complex problems. The two systems complement each other, as accurate intuition relies on prolonged slow deliberation. Deep reading serves as structured exercise for slow thinking. Readers must linger on a subject, retain contextual threads, and trace logical deductions before arriving at conclusions. Expecting a teenager conditioned by 30-second clips to navigate long-form logic mirrors asking a pure sprinter to complete a marathon. While short-form media undermines attention spans, generative AI disrupts logical composition. Previously, students read source materials, selected themes, organized evidence, and drafted essays. Today, a single prompt generates summaries and completed assignments in seconds. PISA 2025 figures reveal extensive generative chatbot usage among Vietnamese students. About 69% report using AI tools for academic tasks, led by drafting papers at 52% and summarizing assigned texts at 47%. Technology does not inherently reduce intelligence, Dr. Vinh noted, but delegating the cognitive exercises that sharpen language and logic inevitably degrades overall comprehension. In a May 2026 study on education for sustainable development in the AI era, Associate Professor Hoa and G20 educational researchers highlighted that teachers must design meaningful learning environments that guide analytical reasoning rather than simply transmitting static knowledge. Educators agree that banning AI in schools is impractical. Instead, pedagogical models must evolve. Students need encouragement to question why a statement holds true and what evidence supports it, moving past the passive hunt for a single correct answer. AI literacy has become an essential competency for instructors. Rather than worrying about academic dishonesty, educators can leverage AI as a cognitive companion. A teacher might present an AI-generated essay and instruct students to spot factual inconsistencies, cross-examine claims, and refine arguments. This process strengthens independent scrutiny. Associate Professor Hoa recommended using Bloom’s Taxonomy to guide students beyond rote memorization toward higher tiers of analysis, synthesis, and critical evaluation. At the systemic level, reading comprehension must expand beyond literature classes and integrate into sciences, history, and social studies. Curricula should transition from memorization toward real-world application and problem-solving. Families provide the final link by nurturing home reading habits centered on thoughtful reflection rather than page volume. When schools, parents, and communities create an environment that values intellectual curiosity, young learners build the independent judgment and lifelong adaptability required to thrive in a digital economy.