ANU accused of ‘hysterical’ response to students using AI to cheat as unis scramble to ‘secure’ assessments | Australian universities

An Australian National University academic has accused students of using AI to cheat for a “hysterical” response as higher education institutions rush to bolster the reliability of assessments.

But a colleague has warned that unless rigor is restored in education, Australia is in danger of sending “our national intellectual talent” to companies in California and China.

The Canberra institution is among universities trying to fight back against the widespread use of artificial intelligence over concerns students are using the technology to cheat or are not learning enough.

The 2025 Australian Digital Engagement Index found that 78.9% of secondary and tertiary students are using productive AI.

The ANU has published a consultation document for academic and teaching staff with three options, including classifying assessments as “secure” (completely free from the risk of AI fraud) or “unsafe”. Another option would require students to declare at which stages of the assessment artificial intelligence was used.

An ANU academic told Guardian Australia they supported the university’s moves but the industry-wide process was so far “panicked”.

“Everyone is adapting in panic, and this situation is exacerbated by the lack of resources to support teaching,” they said. “It really complicates the transition to secure assessment.”

Another ANU academic criticized the university and said it had not been adequately consulted on the changes, warning they could undo some of the progress made in making assessments more inclusive of students with disabilities or caring responsibilities.

“This is not a serious consultation, this is a reactionary reaction, perhaps a hysterical reaction,” they said. “We are at a point of panic right now. This panic has resulted in proposals that could lead to a rollback in participation.”

The academic said their faculty had issued draft guidelines ahead of the second semester and was pushing for more on-campus evaluation.

“Teaching starts in less than two weeks… we are being asked to do more in too little time, with a complete lack of training.”

ANU law professor Will Bateman, who leads research projects on the regulation of AI, said tackling the infiltration of AI use at universities across Australia was critical to stopping the offshoring of intellectual talent.

“If we do not address the erosion of norms and rigor created by AI in our education, we will be relegating our national intellectual talent only to companies in California and China,” he said.

Securing assessments does not mean all assessments will be done in person, Bateman said, but technology needs to be better equipped to respond to the use of artificial intelligence.

“Responding to AI does not automatically mean sending students back to exam halls en masse, but we need to invest heavily in fully secure devices to ensure students are actually learning the material we teach and to reassure people outside the university that the degrees we give are meaningful.”

The University of Queensland introduced new policies to “secure” its assessments earlier this year but has faced criticism for scheduling face-to-face oral assessments at night and on weekends.

Deputy vice-chancellor for education Kris Ryan told Guardian Australia his university had begun considering responses to the use of AI in 2023, but the work currently being done would take time to implement.

“There has been a shift by some academics at the university towards conducting more traditional exams as part of their secure assessment strategy,” he said.

“We owe it to the community to be able to say wholeheartedly that our graduates have the skills we value.”

UQ classes assessments are made on a secure or ‘open’ basis. Secure assessments may include some use of AI, Ryan said, but the university will ask students to demonstrate “a critical evaluation of how the AI ​​came up with the answer.”

Ryan said he understood concerns that changes to exam structures could lead to some students falling behind, but the university was working with staff and students to meet those needs.

“I have three teams working at the moment, whether it’s planning, the types of assessments we encourage academics to do, or working directly with students to look at other alternatives.”

The University of Melbourne is also moving towards a “secure” assessment process; Prof Gregor Kennedy, vice-chancellor for education, said his institution was looking at more oral assessments as part of its AI intervention.

“The university is changing its approach to assessment to embed secure types of assessment that ensure integrity and validate students’ work despite the rise of AI tools,” Kennedy said.

“This evolution includes safer assessments, including interactive oral exams that can be customized to different disciplines and student needs, ensuring our graduates have highly regarded learning, skills and knowledge.”

Barney Glover, the new chairman of the Australian Higher Education Commission, an independent body tasked with overseeing major university reforms, said he was seeing more universities reintroducing oral exams to better test students, but warned universities “have to be really accountable” about how they use or stop the use of artificial intelligence.

He said Australia’s “world-class higher education system will adapt” despite the “challenges” posed by artificial intelligence.