'Gen Z is less sharp than us': Neuroscientist warns of a generational shift as maths and reading scores fall
A neuroscientist’s warning that today’s children may be less cognitively capable than previous generations has reignited a debate over falling academic performance, classroom technology and the way students learn. Dr Jared Cooney Horvath , a neuroscientist and educator, made the argument in written testimony to the US Senate, saying that literacy, numeracy, attention and higher-order reasoning had stalled or declined in several developed countries despite children spending more time in formal education.
“Our kids are less cognitively capable than we were at their age,” Horvath wrote in the opening of his February 2026 account of the testimony. He argues that the widespread use of digital devices in classrooms is an important part of the explanation. His claim draws on international assessment results, research on educational technology and studies examining changes in intelligence test scores. However, the evidence does not establish that an entire generation is less intelligent, or that screens alone caused the reported declines.
What the neuroscientist says the data showsHorvath’s argument begins with a reversal of the Flynn effect, the long-observed rise in average IQ scores across generations in many countries. In his account, this improvement began to flatten or reverse in some Western countries around the turn of the century.
In a February 2026 article published on his own website, Horvath discussed research on changes in different types of cognitive performance. He distinguished between tasks that provide visual clues and those requiring people to use language, working memory and reasoning without such support. He argued that some recent findings point to weaker performance on tasks requiring sustained mental effort and internally organised thinking.
Horvath also cited a 2016 systematic review of studies reporting a negative Flynn effect, in which IQ scores declined rather than increased across certain populations. But this evidence needs careful interpretation: the review covered different countries, age groups and periods, and does not by itself establish that Gen Z is less intelligent than its parents.
PISA results show a real decline in maths and readingThe concern about student performance is supported by international assessment data, although these tests measure academic skills rather than intelligence as a whole.
The OECD’s Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) tests 15-year-olds in reading, mathematics and science. Its September 2026 report found that average reading scores across OECD countries fell by about 14 points between 2022 and 2025, while mathematics scores dropped by nine points. The OECD recorded its lowest average performance so far in reading and mathematics.
The longer-term figures are also significant. Between 2015 and 2025, average reading scores across OECD countries fell by 28 points, equivalent to around one and a half years of learning, while mathematics scores declined by 22 points, or just over a year of learning.
These findings support concerns about academic performance, but they do not prove that students have become less intelligent. PISA measures how effectively students apply their knowledge and skills, and performance can be affected by several factors, including educational disruption, teaching practices, socioeconomic conditions and technology use.
Why Horvath links classroom screens to weaker learningHorvath argues that the timing of declining scores overlaps with the expansion of laptops, tablets and other digital tools in schools. In his Senate testimony, he cited international assessments including PISA, the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) and the Progress in International Reading Literacy Study (PIRLS). He said students reporting heavier classroom computer use often performed less well in reading, mathematics and science.
He also drew on research examining how students read, take notes and retain information. According to his argument, reading long texts on paper and taking handwritten notes can encourage deeper processing than screen-based reading or typing, while digital devices can introduce distractions and encourage task-switching.
However, a relationship between screen use and lower scores does not automatically establish cause and effect. A March 2026 investigation by education news outlet Chalkbeat noted that Horvath’s case combines assessment trends, research on educational technology and theories about how people learn, but that there is no conclusive evidence showing that educational technology is the root cause of falling scores.
Does this mean Gen Z is less intelligent?Not necessarily. Falling test scores are a reason to examine how students learn, but they cannot alone establish that an entire generation is less intelligent than the one before it. Nor do they show that all forms of educational technology harm learning.
The OECD’s latest PISA findings point to a more specific concern: students need strong foundations in reading and mathematics even as schools prepare them to use digital tools. The organisation says technology and AI can support learning when used purposefully, rather than as substitutes for attention, effort and understanding.
Horvath’s warning raises questions about whether schools have adopted digital tools faster than evidence of their effectiveness has developed. The data establishes that reading and mathematics performance has fallen across many education systems. Whether classroom screens are a major cause, and whether the trend represents a wider decline in cognitive ability, remains contested.
Disclaimer: This article is based on publicly available testimony, research and assessment reports. The interpretation of the evidence remains subject to ongoing research and debate.
“Our kids are less cognitively capable than we were at their age,” Horvath wrote in the opening of his February 2026 account of the testimony. He argues that the widespread use of digital devices in classrooms is an important part of the explanation. His claim draws on international assessment results, research on educational technology and studies examining changes in intelligence test scores. However, the evidence does not establish that an entire generation is less intelligent, or that screens alone caused the reported declines.
What the neuroscientist says the data showsHorvath’s argument begins with a reversal of the Flynn effect, the long-observed rise in average IQ scores across generations in many countries. In his account, this improvement began to flatten or reverse in some Western countries around the turn of the century.
In a February 2026 article published on his own website, Horvath discussed research on changes in different types of cognitive performance. He distinguished between tasks that provide visual clues and those requiring people to use language, working memory and reasoning without such support. He argued that some recent findings point to weaker performance on tasks requiring sustained mental effort and internally organised thinking.
Horvath also cited a 2016 systematic review of studies reporting a negative Flynn effect, in which IQ scores declined rather than increased across certain populations. But this evidence needs careful interpretation: the review covered different countries, age groups and periods, and does not by itself establish that Gen Z is less intelligent than its parents.
PISA results show a real decline in maths and readingThe concern about student performance is supported by international assessment data, although these tests measure academic skills rather than intelligence as a whole.
The OECD’s Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) tests 15-year-olds in reading, mathematics and science. Its September 2026 report found that average reading scores across OECD countries fell by about 14 points between 2022 and 2025, while mathematics scores dropped by nine points. The OECD recorded its lowest average performance so far in reading and mathematics.
The longer-term figures are also significant. Between 2015 and 2025, average reading scores across OECD countries fell by 28 points, equivalent to around one and a half years of learning, while mathematics scores declined by 22 points, or just over a year of learning.
These findings support concerns about academic performance, but they do not prove that students have become less intelligent. PISA measures how effectively students apply their knowledge and skills, and performance can be affected by several factors, including educational disruption, teaching practices, socioeconomic conditions and technology use.
Why Horvath links classroom screens to weaker learningHorvath argues that the timing of declining scores overlaps with the expansion of laptops, tablets and other digital tools in schools. In his Senate testimony, he cited international assessments including PISA, the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) and the Progress in International Reading Literacy Study (PIRLS). He said students reporting heavier classroom computer use often performed less well in reading, mathematics and science.
He also drew on research examining how students read, take notes and retain information. According to his argument, reading long texts on paper and taking handwritten notes can encourage deeper processing than screen-based reading or typing, while digital devices can introduce distractions and encourage task-switching.
However, a relationship between screen use and lower scores does not automatically establish cause and effect. A March 2026 investigation by education news outlet Chalkbeat noted that Horvath’s case combines assessment trends, research on educational technology and theories about how people learn, but that there is no conclusive evidence showing that educational technology is the root cause of falling scores.
Does this mean Gen Z is less intelligent?Not necessarily. Falling test scores are a reason to examine how students learn, but they cannot alone establish that an entire generation is less intelligent than the one before it. Nor do they show that all forms of educational technology harm learning.
The OECD’s latest PISA findings point to a more specific concern: students need strong foundations in reading and mathematics even as schools prepare them to use digital tools. The organisation says technology and AI can support learning when used purposefully, rather than as substitutes for attention, effort and understanding.
Horvath’s warning raises questions about whether schools have adopted digital tools faster than evidence of their effectiveness has developed. The data establishes that reading and mathematics performance has fallen across many education systems. Whether classroom screens are a major cause, and whether the trend represents a wider decline in cognitive ability, remains contested.
Disclaimer: This article is based on publicly available testimony, research and assessment reports. The interpretation of the evidence remains subject to ongoing research and debate.
Next Story