AI must serve as a co-pilot in education, not the captain

The emergence of Artificial Intelligence (AI) marks the beginning of the Fourth Industrial Revolution. It is not just a technological upgrade; it is a prosperous shift in how one interacts with knowledge, work, and the very fabric of learning. AI is no longer a notional concept; it is the reality, and increasingly, the future of humankind. Worldwide, countries have launched ambitious AI-focused educational initiatives. To name a few, China and the USA have committed $2.1 billion and $1.8 billion, respectively, to national AI education strategies.

In the global education landscape, AI has rapidly pervaded university systems. Recent data suggests a remarkably high usage rate among students across various regions and educational levels. From high schoolers to college attendees, AI is being employed for a variety of academic tasks, ranging from essay writing and coding to homework help and test preparation. In the United States, approximately a third of college students and a quarter of teenagers are already using AI tools for assignments and learning support. Usage rates in Europe show similar trends, with 68 per cent of German students, 35 per cent of Swedish university students, and a high percentage (estimated 60-70 per cent) of youth in France and Italy leveraging AI for academic support. In the UAE, AI adoption among university students is particularly notable, reaching 85 per cent, with students commonly using it for essay writing, translation, summarisation, and preparing for class discussions.

Meanwhile, the adoption rate of AI among premier global universities is also rising. Institutions such as the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Harvard, and Princeton show adoption rates above 10 per cent, indicating not only student-led use but also institutional engagement with AI tools. The pace of adoption reflects a growing recognition of AI’s transformative potential, while simultaneously calling for a critical examination of its implications.

Process of AI vs Human

The process through which a human engages with knowledge, especially in academic settings, typically begins with understanding, conceptualisation, and then aiming for output generation. Learners absorb ideas, deliberate over them, explore counter arguments, and finally produce an output rooted in critical thinking. This journey develops not only understanding but also the ability to question, analyse, and innovate. AI, by contrast, is inherently output-driven. Its algorithms are trained to predict, generate, or respond based on pre-learned patterns and user inputs. While it can simulate understanding, it does not experience learning in the human sense. If students/users increasingly rely on AI without engaging in foundational learning processes, there is a risk of raising a generation proficient in using tools but alienated from original thought. The challenge is not to shut AI out, but to train students to question it, contextualise it, and when necessary, override it.

Another vital prospect emerges: Will the future of academia and research be dictated by AI models rather than human insight? If learners bypass the rigour of thinking and analysis in favour of instant outputs, there is a risk of sacrificing the intellectual spirit that underpins higher education. The overuse or uncritical use of generative AI might produce learners who are fast but shallow, technically efficient but conceptually hollow and such future would hardly be considered progressive for any country.

Another critical dimension is intellectual property and originality. With widespread access to similar AI tools, two users entering similar prompts are likely to receive structurally or thematically similar responses. In such a scenario, what guarantees the originality of the work submitted? Does AI blur the boundaries of plagiarism, especially when the content is not copied from another student, but from the same algorithm? This is why human intervention in AI-generated content is not just advisable, but essential. Generative AI must not be left to operate in an intellectual vacuum. Students must be encouraged to critically evaluate, modify, and personalise AI outputs rather than keeping it raw. Otherwise, the notion of authorship, creativity, and ownership is precariously undermined. Moreover, concerns around data privacy, surveillance, and algorithmic bias must be addressed, particularly as AI models are often trained on unregulated datasets which may carry inherent socio-cultural biases.

The Indian scenario

The AI trend is equally evident in India, where AI adoption among students is becoming mainstream. For instance, over 85 per cent of high school students in India report using AI tools for purposes like career guidance, assignment help, and college preparation. Among university students, around 73 per cent are aware of AI tools, with 19 per cent using them daily. Engineering undergraduates have shown particularly high engagement levels, over 57 per cent using AI regularly for coursework, coding assistance, and academic queries. While general college students show a moderate usage rate of around 35 per cent, broader surveys of internet users reveal that nearly 50 per cent are using AI tools, and about 28 per cent specifically use ChatGPT.

Data underlines that AI adoption is not restricted to elite institutions or urban pockets but is becoming widespread across diverse educational and demographic groups in the country.

Way forward and suggested interventions

Universities, therefore, must strategise on leveraging AI where it enhances productivity, while reinforcing academic integrity and critical thinking. For example, AI is remarkably efficient at tasks like summarising large documents, videos, conducting preliminary literature reviews, and supporting data organisation. These time-consuming processes can be accelerated without compromising creativity. But when it comes to assignments, thesis writing, or analytical essays, students must engage deeply with the content, not just the tool. Further, considering the guidelines of UGC, universities must also develop an internal policy for the responsible use of AI by various stakeholders. 

Educators must shift the emphasis from the product to the process of learning. Imagine a classroom where AI and manual outputs are compared; students could assess not only the quality but also the depth, accuracy, and nuance between the two. Such exercises would enhance awareness of AI’s capabilities and limitations, cultivating a balanced approach rather than blind dependence. Further, to guide this integration ethically, universities should consider establishing dedicated AI Centres. Already in the Union Budget 2025-26 by the Government of India, a budget of Rs 500 crore have been allocated for having a centre of excellence governing AI in education. Moreover, PPP can also be explored for setting up such centres with innovations.

AICTE declared 2025 as the ‘Year of AI,’ aiming to impact over 14,000 institutions and 40 million students through AI awareness, curriculum redesign, and faculty training. Symbiosis International has established the Symbiosis Artificial Intelligence Institute (SAII) to offer interdisciplinary AI programs and global industry collaboration. These efforts mark a coordinated national strategy to embed AI across education, promote ethical use, and enhance India’s technological competitiveness globally. Such efforts would not only facilitate research on AI’s educational applications but also monitor its psychological, academic, and social impacts. Through controlled experimentation, these centres can develop context-specific guidelines, helping both trainers and learners use AI responsibly.

However, in the rush to embrace technological advancement, one must not lose sight of what education fundamentally stands for the cultivation of minds, not just machines. AI is here to stay. The challenge is not to resist it, but to channel it with caution, with ethics, and with a deep commitment to preserving the sanctity of human intellect.

Integrating AI into curriculum design, using right AI tools with an assurance of data security, regular capacity building of users (be it students, teachers, or other stakeholders) for harnessing the best of AIs, establishing critical thinking labs, and developing robust AI written detection tools will help ensure a balanced and sustainable future where human intellect and AI capabilities complement each other, especially in the context of higher education system. Empowering educators through regular AI training, revising course structures to include AI-aware assessments, and including AI ethics as a cross-cutting theme across disciplines will be crucial.

As we move towards a future where human intellect and machine intelligence coexist, we must preserve the spirit of originality and ethical responsibility. AI must serve as a co-pilot in education, not the captain.

Mohit Sharma, Biswajit Pramanick, and K L Bhutia work at the Dr Rajendra Prasad Central Agricultural University, Samastipur, Bihar

Views expressed are the authors’ own and don’t necessarily reflect those of Down To Earth