Amanda Cullen is about to graduate from North Carolina State University in 2030, yet most of her courses forbid the use of artificial intelligence. The restriction reflects a wider uncertainty across US higher-education institutions about how to integrate a technology that is already reshaping the labour market.
What is happening on campus?
Cullen, a first-year student, says the majority of her classes have a strict "no AI" rule unless the tool is cited. She told EuroHerald that, while she uses AI occasionally, an outright ban feels unrealistic given its prevalence in modern careers.
"If it's such a mainstream thing in careers, we should know how to do it in school," she said.
Other students share her view. Lauren Callen, a second-year mechanical engineering student, argues that professors should set clear guidelines rather than prohibit AI entirely. In her introductory Python course, AI tools are allowed provided students upload transcripts of prompts and responses.
Why does it matter?
Industry data underscores the urgency. A study by consulting firm McKinsey found that 88 % of companies are already using AI, while a PWC report published in June indicated a 62 % wage premium for workers with AI skills. At the same time, AI makes cheating easier, raising concerns that students may miss out on essential skill development.
Faculty are split on the solution. Sabrina Habib, associate professor of visual communications at the University of South Carolina, initially faced resistance from colleagues who feared AI would erode foundational learning. Over time, attitudes have shifted as AI becomes a recognised workplace skill.
"We don't want to eliminate it because then we're missing the opportunity of teaching how to use it in a way that's ethical and critical," she explained.
At NC State, there is no university-wide AI policy; instead, each department receives resources to set its own expectations, leaving students to navigate varying rules.
What could happen next?
Universities are likely to move toward more nuanced policies that balance academic integrity with real-world preparation. Possible approaches include mandatory AI literacy modules, transparent disclosure requirements, and reflective assignments that assess how students employ the technology.
For students like Cullen, the choice may be personal, limiting their own AI use, but broader institutional change will be needed to ensure graduates are equipped for an AI-infused economy.