What will higher education and academic integrity look like in 10, 20, or 30 years? Will we still be clinging to our 20th century models of teaching, learning and assessment, or will we have adapted and evolved to meet the challenge that generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) poses for us?
That is the question that Mary Davis, Zeenath Khan and I pose in our new quick-read book - Academic Integrity in the Age of AI - an element in the GenAI in Education series edited by Mark Warschauer and Tamara Tate for Cambridge University Press (April 2026). From examining the history of academic integrity and the technological disruptions to it (from the printing press to agentic AI), we situate a fictional story of Nexus University in 2045 and, in Bryan Alexander fashion, our arguments support the possibility of that dystopia. We argue that this can arise from the reign of traditional grading schemas, the AI company strategy of enticing cognitive outsourcing, the credentialing business of higher education, the over-reliance on technology and the growing influence of predictive AI to bolster quantitative measures of student success like retention and graduation rates.
With the strong intent of not leaving readers in a helpless and hopeless state, but rather to inspire in them a sense of power in their human agency, we then answer practical questions for now in terms of policies and procedures, facilitating and validating learning, and teaching with and about GenAI with integrity. We end with a call to action that’s best summed up by this paragraph:
'It’s important to remind ourselves that there is also integrity in resisting what has been introduced to us. The dominance of the general purpose “synthetic media generators” (Bender & Hanna, 2025) does not have to be inevitable. We, the educational market place, can demand specifically tailored technology that is more accurate, thoughtfully designed, and useful, and less susceptible to the cognitive offloading of learning. A commitment to academic integrity is the countervailing force against anything that undermines learning. Some might label any resistance as “anti-progress” or “moral panic”, but such labeling diminishes the very real challenges of responding to change, the unfairness of educators having to respond to inventions created without their input and thrust upon them as inevitable, the dizziness of the pace of disruption, and the technology influencing practices faster than we can research their positive and negative impacts. Is GenAI a threat to teaching, learning and assessing with integrity? Undoubtedly. Could it also engender positive changes that will benefit all involved? Sure, it could. The point is that it’s our choice.'
On AI Awareness Day, Thursday June 4 2026, Mary, Zeenath and I will be hosting a dynamic conversation in which we will talk about the book and answer questions like: how did we work with Claude to write the 2045 fictional story, what are the solutions to not cementing higher education in a surveillance state, is academic integrity still relevant in the age of AI, is GenAI really that different of a technological disruption to those that came before it, and what role does human agency play in the age of agentic AI that is, reportedly, smarter and faster than us?
Join us to engage in the conversation. Share your insights into how we might resist the hype of GenAI so as to protect integrity, but also student development of durable human skills like critical thinking and metacognition. Or, talk about your experimentation with integrating GenAI into the curriculum in ways that actually build those skills and ensure students will still have a value–ad in a workplace likely to be dominated by AI. We want to hear from you!
Let’s talk together to avoid the dystopian future foretold in the book and heed the advice of the main character, Dr. Verity Shield:
‘Our biggest challenge remains the same,’ she continues, noting the furrowed brows of the board members. ‘We're not just fighting technology; we're fighting complacency. Too many instructors still teach as if AI doesn't exist, making our job exponentially harder.’
A hand raises in the back. ‘Dr. Shield, given your background in both government security and academia, do you believe our current approach is sustainable?’
Verity pauses, weighing her words carefully. This is the crux of her internal struggle, the question that keeps her up at night.
‘Sustainable? No. Necessary for now? Absolutely. But our long-term strategy needs to evolve beyond detection and punishment. We need to fundamentally rethink education itself.’
We hope to see you on June 4 to discuss, debate and maybe, just maybe, inspire our agency to put humanity front and center of the teaching, learning and assessment processes of higher education. We’ll be giving away some copies of the book to quiz winners among participating audience members.
Please register to attend our Zoom webinar on Thursday June 4 (3pm UK, 10am EST, 7am Pacific).
Dr Tricia Bertram Gallant is the Director of Academic Integrity Office and Triton Testing Center at the University of California San Diego (UCSD), and Board Emeritus of the International Center for Academic Integrity.