New College Board Research: Faculty Express Near-Universal Concern That Student AI Use Undermines Original Writing and Critical Thinking

As generative artificial intelligence becomes prevalent in higher education, the latest entry in College Board’s AI research brief series reveals that college faculty believe AI is already transforming college student learning, often in potentially troubling ways.

According to College Board’s most recent AI research brief, “College Faculty Perceptions of Generative Artificial Intelligence in Higher Education,” nearly three-quarters (74%) of faculty report that students are using AI to write essays or papers, and 67% say students are using it to paraphrase or rewrite content. Almost half of faculty believe at least half of their students are using AI for writing-related tasks.

“Faculty are navigating this critical transition, as AI rapidly expands in higher education,” said Jessica Howell, PhD, vice president of Research at College Board. “This research shows that faculty have serious concerns about AI’s impact on critical thinking, original writing, and academic integrity. Faculty, especially those in writing-intensive courses, are asking important questions about how to preserve core learning goals while preparing students for a world where AI will be part of the workplace.”

This higher education research builds on two previous briefs examining AI use in high schools. In October 2025, College Board reported that 84% of high school students use generative AI for schoolwork tasks such as brainstorming, revising essays, and research, while school leaders and educators are still clarifying policies and guidelines. A December 2025 follow-up found AI use and high school policies vary widely by student demographics, academic achievement, grade level, and school context, with disparities in access and official guidance revealing an emerging digital divide.

During summer 2025, College Board surveyed more than 3,000 U.S. college faculty. The research finds that faculty sentiment toward AI skews negative, with 45% reporting an overall negative view of AI use in higher education and 34% reporting a positive view. Despite their concerns, most faculty are experimenting with AI themselves, with 77% saying they have used AI in their professional role.

Differing Perceptions by Institution Selectivity and Discipline

The findings also emphasize a growing divide within higher education. Faculty at more selective institutions report higher levels of student AI use and greater concern about its academic impact, while faculty at open enrollment colleges are more likely to see AI as a practical instructional tool and report using it themselves.

By discipline, the divide is even sharper. Faculty in writing-intensive fields such as English, history, and humanities are more likely to report student AI use, greater AI use for detecting plagiarism or academic dishonesty, and more negative attitudes toward AI. In contrast, faculty in STEM and business disciplines are generally more likely to report using AI themselves, for research and their own academic writing, and to express more positive views.

Key differences include:

• Negative sentiment toward AI increases with institutional selectivity.
• Faculty at open enrollment colleges are more likely to report using AI themselves to create or revise teaching materials, develop lesson plans, and detect plagiarism.
• Faculty at more selective colleges are more likely to report widespread student AI use, particularly for writing tasks.
• Faculty in English and other writing-intensive disciplines report the highest levels of classroom disruption and challenges related to AI use.
• Writing-based disciplines are more likely to have formal classroom AI policies in place.
• Faculty in STEM and business disciplines are among the most likely to use AI professionally and to view it positively.

Concerns About Impacts of AI

While some faculty see potential benefits, such as personalized explanations and support for understanding complex concepts, far more agree on the negative impacts of AI use than on its positive impacts. More than 84% agree that AI reduces students’ critical thinking, originality, and deep engagement with course material, while 88% are concerned about overreliance on automation. Regarding academic integrity, 92% of faculty are concerned about plagiarism or dishonesty facilitated by AI.

Challenges Around Classroom AI Guidance

Nearly three-quarters (72%) of faculty report that they face at least minor challenges managing student AI use. Yet confidence remains low with only 21% reporting feeling very confident guiding AI use in their classrooms and 79% saying they are either just beginning to explore what’s needed or still need guidance. Almost half report having a formal classroom policy on AI use, while many say institutional guidance and support remain inconsistent.

The brief highlights a growing tension in higher education: College student AI use is expanding rapidly, but faculty consensus on how to adjust has not yet formed. The report emphasizes that further research and evidence-based policy development will help institutions balance innovation with academic integrity and student learning.
 

About College Board
College Board reaches more than 7 million students a year, helping them navigate the path from high school to college and career. Our not-for-profit membership organization was founded more than 120 years ago. We pioneered programs like the SAT^® and AP^® to expand opportunities for students and help them develop the skills they need. Our BigFuture^® program helps students plan for college, pay for college, and explore careers. Learn more at cb.org.