How have university assignments changed and will they now successfully combat AI?

Portfolios, digital exams, oral presentations. These assessment types are now the majority of what humanities students face at their mid-module and end of semester assignments. The traditional essay seems to be losing its place in higher education, undeniably due to its vulnerability in the battle against AI. 

These new attempts to test student knowledge are completely understandable, but this does not necessarily mean they are approved of by those impacted. A large number of undergraduates I know have openly spoken about how assessment type will directly impact which module they choose, as they often possess an intense desire to avoid the stress of in-person exams, or the unfamiliarity of more creative testing, such as posters or guidebooks.

There is, of course, the argument that we are in an adjustment period: students from the 2026 period onwards will have no qualms or concerns about these varied assessment types, given that they will have little to no experience writing the typical university essay. 

In his lucidly written analysis of AI in university assignments, lecturer Michael Jones states that “university assessment has always mirrored deeper beliefs regarding what is considered learning and whose learning is being demonstrated”. The solution to this, therefore, is to make space for assessments which track and display the personal learning journey of the individual, through oral presentation and reflective portfolios or commentaries. A typical essay cannot be graded accurately when the marker does not know where the student’s intelligence ends and the artificial intelligence begins. When we consider this, it is hard to blame academic institutions for the changes in assignments, however challenging they may seem to those who find comfort in the critical essay. 

But unfortunately, we cannot immediately presume that AI use will now be overcome in universities - technology is inescapable and will always be integrated into student work if it makes something easier. It simply means that the assessments now offered will not have the ability for students to use AI when completing them, unlike the critical essay, which can be generated within seconds. As frustrating this may be for some, it has its benefits; undergraduates choose to study in order to gain an esteemed level of higher education, which is not possible if there is no form of substantial testing on the understanding of the individual.

AI and other forms of digital assistance ultimately decrease the capacity for creativity and critical thinking. As it continues to grow exponentially, I would advise that humanities students prepare for an even older form of assessment than the critical essay - the dreaded in person exam.