Essay

Universities should stop treating AI writing tools as a threat and start teaching them as a core academic skill. Graduates will enter workplaces where drafting, summarising and translating with AI is routine, so refusing to engage simply widens the gap between study and employment. If students learn to prompt responsibly, check sources and document how tools were used, AI can strengthen research and clarity rather than replace thinking. Bans also punish honest students while rewarding those who hide their use. Compulsory instruction would establish shared standards of transparency, accuracy and academic integrity.

Making AI tools compulsory risks undermining the very abilities higher education is meant to develop. Many students already struggle to write coherent arguments; relying on automated drafting could fossilise weak skills and reduce motivation to practise. Assessment would also become less reliable: even with declarations, it is difficult to know how much work is a student’s own, and unequal access to paid versions could widen attainment gaps. Rather than mandating AI, universities should redesign tasks towards in-class writing, oral defences and process-based portfolios, while offering optional training for those who choose to use such tools.