Short answer: No, not the good ones. AI can already solve a JEE paper and explain a concept ten times without losing patience. But solving is not teaching: the same AI can help a student learn or leave them worse off in the exam, depending on how it is built and used. For most JEE and NEET students, the realistic future isn’t a machine instead of a teacher. It is the one-to-one attention a big class can’t give, from an AI teacher, alongside the people who keep you going.
AI can solve the paper. That isn’t the question
In an informal test published in June 2026, three of the newest AI models sat JEE Advanced 2026, and all three outscored every human who took the paper (LearnOpenCV, 2026). It isn’t an official result, but the direction is clear: getting the answer is no longer the hard part for a machine.
For a student, that is the wrong thing to measure. A calculator multiplies faster than you, and you still had to learn multiplication. The question that matters is whether AI can make you able to solve the paper: alone, in three hours, with no help in the room.
The same AI can help you or hurt you
The clearest evidence comes from a 2025 study of nearly 1,000 high-school maths students in Turkey, published in PNAS (Bastani and others, 2025). Students practised with one of two versions of GPT-4, or with no AI at all, and then sat an exam without it.
| Group | Practice scores | Exam scores, without AI |
|---|---|---|
| No AI (textbook and notes) | Baseline | Baseline |
| A plain chatbot, like ChatGPT | 48% higher | 17% lower |
| A tutor version that gave hints, not answers | 127% higher | About the same as no AI |
The students with the plain chatbot did better in practice and worse in the exam than students who never had AI. The researchers’ explanation: they used it as a crutch. It solved the problems, so they didn’t learn to. The tutor version, built to give hints and steps instead of answers, didn’t do that harm.
So the honest answer to “is AI good for studying?” is that it depends on two things: whether the AI is built to teach, and whether you use it to think or to skip thinking.
What one-to-one attention is worth
Teachers have long known that a student learns more with a tutor than in a crowd. A review of dozens of randomised trials of tutoring in schools found an average gain of 0.37 standard deviations (Nickow, Oreopoulos and Quan, 2020). In plain terms, that is enough to move a student from the middle of the class to roughly the 64th percentile.
The problem has always been the cost. Most students never get a tutor. They get a seat in a big class, and a doubt that waits until tomorrow, or never gets asked.
This is where a well-built AI tutor changes things. In a 2025 randomised trial at Harvard, 194 students in an introductory physics course learned lessons two ways: in an active-learning class with an instructor, and with an AI tutor that guided them through each part of each problem in turn (Kestin, Miller and others, Scientific Reports, 2025). With the AI tutor, students’ median learning gains were more than double, in less time: a median of 49 minutes, against about an hour of class.
The authors are careful about the limits, and so should we be. It was one course at one university, and the tutor’s accuracy relied on solutions the teachers had written in advance. It shows what a tutor built for teaching can do, not that any chatbot will do it.
What an AI teacher does better than a big class
| A big class or coaching batch | A well-built AI teacher | |
|---|---|---|
| Explaining again | Once or twice, at the class’s pace | As many times as you need, at your pace |
| A doubt at 11 pm | Waits for the next class | Answered then, step by step |
| The question you’re embarrassed to ask | Often never asked | Asked privately, with no one watching |
| Practice | Checked days later, if at all | Marked straight away, with the reason |
| Where you keep slipping | Hard to see among a hundred students | Tracked, chapter by chapter |
What a good teacher still does better
- Noticing you. A teacher who knows you sees when you are exhausted, scared before a mock, or quietly giving up. AI only knows what you type.
- Holding you to it. A class to turn up to, someone expecting your homework, friends preparing beside you: accountability is a big part of why coaching works, and an app is easy to close.
- Judgement from experience. Which chapters to protect when time runs out, how to recover from a bad first paper, when to rest. AI can give general advice; a mentor who has seen hundreds of students knows you.
- Catching the AI. AI still makes confident mistakes, especially with diagrams and long numericals. A teacher, or your NCERT book, is the check.
How to tell if AI is teaching you or doing your homework
Use this five-point test with any app or chatbot:
- You try first. At least ten minutes on a problem before you ask.
- It gives a step, not the answer. If it hands you the full solution every time, ask it to stop.
- You can explain it back. If you can’t explain the solution in your own words, you haven’t learned it yet.
- You test without it. At least once a week, a timed set or a mock with no AI at all.
- Your mock scores move, not just your practice. The Turkish students’ practice scores rose 48% while their exam scores fell 17%. Watch the exam, not the practice.
What this means for you
- If you have a good teacher or coaching, use AI between classes: for doubts at night, for re-explaining what went too fast, and for marked practice. Keep your teacher as the one who checks.
- If you don’t, because coaching is far away or too expensive, an AI teacher built to teach, not just answer, closes much of the gap. Add the human parts on purpose: a weekly target that someone checks, a study partner, and a real mock every week.
- If you’re a parent, judge an AI app the way you would judge a tutor. Does it make your child do the work, or does it do the work? Does it show progress you can see? And be wary of anyone who promises a rank: no teacher, human or AI, can.
That is the idea behind monklearning: a teacher that takes every chapter aloud, one to one, answers doubts from a photo at any hour, and marks practice the way the real exam does, for JEE Main and NEET UG. It is meant to give every student the attention only a few have had, not to replace the people who keep them going.
Sources
- Bastani, H., Bastani, O., Sungu, A., Ge, H., Kabakcı, Ö. and Mariman, R. (2025). Generative AI without guardrails can harm learning: evidence from high school mathematics. PNAS 122(26). Plain-language summary: Knowledge at Wharton.
- Kestin, G., Miller, K., Klales, A., Milbourne, T. and Ponti, G. (2025). AI tutoring outperforms in-class active learning. Scientific Reports 15, 17458.
- Nickow, A., Oreopoulos, P. and Quan, V. (2020). The impressive effects of tutoring on PreK-12 learning. NBER Working Paper 27476.
- LearnOpenCV (2026). JEE Advanced 2026: we tested AI on the toughest exam. An informal test, not an official result.