Universities should not be adopting AI to automate their own absurdities

Universities are grappling with the potential of AI integration, with institutions like Harvard introducing AI instructors. However, implementing AI systems to address perceived issues is not the solution. Instead, AI may exacerbate bureaucracy, creating more policies, forms, and oversight roles for already overburdened faculty.

The danger lies not in AI destroying universities, but in universities using AI to maintain dysfunctional processes. Faculty may spend less time on research and teaching, focusing more on administrative tasks that do not contribute to knowledge production or student education. U.K. universities already exhibit this trend, with student work passing through multiple systems, generating logs, deadlines, and audit trails.

This administrative incoherence extends to North American universities as well. While AI could theoretically streamline processes, the incentive is often to make work more visible rather than simplify it. Universities may develop AI-use policies, requiring module-level statements and disclosure forms, leading to increased administrative labor attached to teaching.

Responsibility for academic integrity, fairness, and assessment validity lies with faculty, but they lack control over procurement, system design, policy, and procedures. This creates an asymmetric power dynamic where faculty bear the consequences of system failures, while institutions claim credit for successful implementation.

The trend could lead to universities encouraging faculty AI avatars and cutting hours, ostensibly for efficiency and cost savings, but instead expanding bureaucracy to manage AI avatars and maintain compliance. In this scenario, bureaucracy expands to address its own growth, undermining the quality that students pay high tuition fees for.

An alternative to administrative expansion is to impose a simple rule: no new compliance requirement without removing an equivalent existing burden. Universities should provide protected time, technical support, and a single integrated platform when expecting faculty to adapt assessments or use new technology. This ensures that faculty are not overwhelmed with additional responsibilities and can focus on teaching and research.