When AI Levels the Playing Field—or Makes the Gap Wider

This July in Shanghai, more than 50 researchers from nine countries—from Russia and China to Canada and Singapore—gathered for the International Summer Institute on Artificial Intelligence in Education. For several days, the city became a global hub of discussion on how universities are responding to the rapid rise of AI.

Artificial intelligence is shaking up higher education—yet not the way many expected. For some students, it’s a launchpad to ambitious research and innovative problem-solving. For others, it’s a tad more than a shortcut for homework. And for universities, the question is not whether to use AI, but how to do so without leaving anyone behind.

This paradox was at the heart of the International Summer Institute on AI in Education, held in July in Shanghai. The event gathered more than 50 researchers from nine countries, including Russia, China, Canada, and Singapore, to trade insights on how the academic world is grappling with ChatGPT, neural networks, and their fast-spreading influence.

The divide is already clear. Elite universities are experimenting with assignments that require clever use of AI, while less selective institutions are more likely to ban it altogether. As one participant put it, “AI is magnifying the strengths of the strong and the weaknesses of the weak.”

Yaroslav Kuzminov, Academic Supervisor at HSE University, summed up the concern: “Strong universities will soon become even stronger, drawing on their access to technology and innovative faculty. Meanwhile, less selective institutions risk falling further behind, unable to keep pace with modern realities—especially in areas like assessment.”

That shift is most visible in exams and grading. Traditional essays and multiple-choice tests are increasingly irrelevant when a chatbot can complete them in minutes. Instead, forward-thinking educators are designing challenges that build higher-order skills—from data analysis to critical thinking and structured argumentation. “We also need tools that track each student’s progress over time,” noted Evgeniy Terentev, Director of the Institute of Education.

Still, Terentev cautioned, the so-called AI revolution in universities may be less dramatic than headlines suggest. Many institutions remain on the fence, adopting a wait-and-see approach rather than bold strategies.

Survey data presented at the Institute backed this up. A study of students at 10 highly selective Russian universities revealed no consistent policy on AI use. Just 7.3% reported an outright ban, 6.6% said their university allowed full freedom, and nearly one in five admitted they had no idea what the rules were at all—a sign of troubling opacity.

Patterns in usage also emerged. High-achieving students are turning to AI for sophisticated problem-solving, while their less successful peers tend to use it for leisure or routine tasks. Understandably, STEM students are the leaders in advanced AI adoption.

The Summer Institute wrapped up on a hopeful note, with participants presenting projects that looked beyond the classroom. Ideas ranged from adaptive AI tutors that tailor school learning to each pupil, to innovative ways of supporting postgraduate research.

The big question remains: Will AI ultimately level the playing field, or will it deepen the cracks in global education? For now, the answer depends less on the technology itself and more on how universities choose to use it.