As artificial intelligence tools such as ChatGPT become increasingly integrated into education systems worldwide, much of the narrative has focused on a supposed crisis of academic integrity. Critics warn of students cheating en masse, forfeiting genuine learning, and entering the workforce less prepared than their predecessors. Yet, first-hand student perspectives reveal a more nuanced reality: the rapid embrace of AI in higher education is less about laziness and more about adapting to systemic upheaval, resource scarcity, and the lingering aftershocks of the Covid-19 pandemic (The Guardian).
The impact of AI on academic practices matters deeply for Thailand, where educators and policymakers are navigating similar tensions. The story unfolding in the UK, as recounted in a recent commentary by a university student, highlights that students aren’t rejecting learning—they’re struggling to keep pace with shifting expectations, inconsistent assessments, and mounting financial pressure. Understanding these drivers is essential for Thai universities, which are also facing debates about assessment fairness, digital learning, and AI ethics.
In the UK, widespread school closures during the Covid-19 pandemic fundamentally altered the academic landscape. Starting in March 2020, exams were repeatedly canceled, replaced with teacher-assessed grades and a mix of online and in-person evaluations. This instability bred uncertainty and left gaps in students’ learning, particularly for those from less privileged backgrounds. When in-person exams resumed, a punitive clampdown on grade inflation left many students with disappointing results, further fueling anxieties about fairness and preparedness. According to the commentary, more than 70% of universities still rely on online assessments, a striking shift from the pre-pandemic reliance on traditional, handwritten tests (The Guardian).
These conditions created fertile ground for the adoption of AI as a study tool. Rather than seeing AI as a shortcut, many students use it to compensate for missed instruction and to manage competing demands, such as the record-high prevalence (68%) of part-time employment among students (The Guardian). The use of generative AI is seen as a pragmatic response to time pressures, ambiguous assessment criteria, and limited resources, rather than an outright abdication of academic responsibility.
Educational experts echo these observations. Research published in “Computers & Education” has found that students turn to AI to assist with brainstorming research ideas, summarizing complex topics, and structuring arguments, not solely to ‘cheat’ (ScienceDirect). The line between legitimate support and academic misconduct is blurry, particularly as universities experiment with new exam formats and digital learning environments. In one cited case, the same university offered both online and handwritten exams for identical papers, with variations even within the same academic year. This lack of consistency only magnifies confusion about what constitutes ‘proportionate’ use of AI—and what is considered abuse.
For Thailand, the situation offers several cautionary lessons. Thai schools, too, underwent extended closures and digital transitions during the Covid era (UNICEF Thailand). Classroom inequality widened, particularly for students in rural or low-income households. As the Ministry of Education and local universities consider further digital integration, calls for clearer AI usage policies and stable, equitable assessments grow in urgency. According to a recent statement by an official from the Ministry of Higher Education, Science, Research and Innovation, the issue is not whether AI should be used, but how it can be incorporated responsibly to “enhance learning without undermining the value of academic honesty.”
Notably, the pressure to use AI is intertwined with worsening student finances. British students, like their Thai counterparts, face rising tuition and living costs. The UK’s new 40-year student loan repayment plan mirrors anxieties in Thailand, where recent proposals to modify student loan conditions have provoked debate among university leaders (Bangkok Post). With many Thai students juggling part-time jobs and family obligations, efficiency tools like AI seem inevitable—even indispensable.
The challenges are not limited to Western countries. A survey by Chulalongkorn University found that over 50% of Thai undergraduates had used AI-powered apps for research or language support, especially in subjects like English, science, and information technology (Chulalongkorn University). Yet, survey respondents expressed confusion over what teachers considered “acceptable” AI use, and nearly 40% felt that university policies lagged behind reality. The risk, Thai researchers warn, is the uneven enforcement of academic standards, fueling resentment or perceptions of bias—particularly if inconsistent exam formats persist.
Thailand’s educational culture is also shaped by reverence for exams (การสอบ) as a marker of personal effort and achievement. The surge in AI adoption creates friction with this tradition, raising questions about the authenticity of learning and the future value of degrees. Education reform advocates, however, see a chance for growth: “The role of the teacher must shift—they need to guide students in critical and ethical AI use, not simply police against it,” said an education scholar at a prominent Thai university.
The student perspective underscores that today’s learners are not lazy or less capable; they are responding to a system in flux. As universities globally, including Thailand’s top-ranked institutions, deliberate on the right mix of exam formats and the boundaries of AI, clarity and consistency will be vital. Students cannot be expected to navigate shifting rules on their own: explicit guidelines about AI’s appropriate role, coupled with robust digital literacy education, will allow the technology to strengthen—not weaken—learning outcomes.
Looking forward, the intersection of AI, assessment, and student wellbeing will require Thai universities to regularly review and update academic policies. Instead of a strict crackdown, experts argue for a transparent dialogue between students, teachers, and administrators. Policies that reward original thought, resilience, and adaptability—qualities valued both in Thai culture and the global job market—will enable AI to support student growth rather than undermine it.
Thai educators and officials should consider pilot programs that integrate AI in language learning, research, and STEM education, while maintaining clear distinctions between supportive use and plagiarism. As Thailand seeks to establish itself as an innovation hub in the ASEAN region, training students in ethical and effective AI use could become a competitive advantage. Meanwhile, efforts to reduce financial burdens and streamline assessment formats will help ensure that today’s students emerge not only as users of new technologies, but also as critical, adaptable thinkers equipped for the real world.
For Thai students and parents, the message is clear: AI is here to stay in education, but thoughtful use and clear community standards will make the difference between a crisis of confidence and a renaissance in learning. Students, teachers, and parents can all participate in shaping a future where technology and tradition work hand in hand.
Sources:
- The Guardian: It’s true that my fellow students are embracing AI – but this is what the critics aren’t seeing
- Computers & Education research on student AI use
- UNICEF Thailand on post-pandemic education challenges
- Bangkok Post on student loan reform and cost of living
- Chulalongkorn University report on student AI adoption