One in four students are concerned that they learn little or nothing when they use generative artificial intelligence for study, but?11 in 20 expect their universities to provide them with AI tools anyway, according to new data.?

A of more than 1,200 Australian students has revealed contradictory views about AI, with people determined to use it despite questioning its value.

The poll, commissioned by study support company Studiosity, found that seven in 10 worry about mistakes or accusations of cheating or plagiarism, while academically struggling students aged under 26 were particularly sceptical that AI tools enhanced their learning or skills.

Yet 75 per cent of international students, 60 per cent of male students and 55 per cent of students overall expected their institutions to provide AI support tools. Business, STEM and medicine students were particularly adamant – even though only 40 per cent expressed strong conviction that AI improved their learning.

The study was part of a broader survey of more than 10,000 people in eight countries, conducted for Studiosity’s annual student well-being survey. It found that students’ top reason for wanting university-supplied AI tools was so that they could have “confidence” that their assignments were “on the right track”.

Studiosity founder Jack Goodman said students were in an “uncomfortable” position where they felt “pressured to use the technology because they see all of their peers using the technology” – but worried that it was merely creating a “veneer of learning”.

“They are looking for guidance from their universities,” Goodman said. “They do not…feel comfortable being left to what is effectively the Wild West of unconstrained and unregulated generative AI tools for academic and learning purposes.

“The vast majority of students come to university wanting to learn. These tools are just not fit for purpose. They will generate text. They will give answers. But they…certainly aren’t a reflection of students’ intellectual effort. It’s incredible technology [but] there’s nothing constraining [it] from bypassing learning entirely.”

He said universities had an obligation to equip students with “ethical learning-only generative AI” so that “students don’t have anxiety about using something inappropriately, and both the institutions and the students know that learning is taking place”.

Studiosity helps universities meet that obligation through its “” service, which provides students with “help not answers” feedback and teachers with “evidence of learning”. Goodman insisted that his views had not been biased by his company’s products.

“The single most important thing…every student who goes to university learns is how to think,” he said. “It’s an enormous mistake to assume that…generative AI is suitable for use in an educational setting. It has not been built to help people learn. It’s been built to give answers to questions. Simply answering questions is not a learning experience.”

The survey also found that students were under massive workload pressure, with 26 per cent of surveyed Australian students working full-time – up from just 4 per cent in 2018 – and 17 per cent combining full-time jobs with full-time study loads.

“That’s really unsustainable,” Goodman said. “It’s almost impossible…to be a full-time student and a full-time employee. We don’t necessarily know what jobs they’re doing. They may be doing 35, 38, 40 hours a week…in a ride share company or a retail establishment or café. The workload of study in the evenings and on the weekends just makes that exhausting.”

john.ross@timeshighereducation.com