Decide: Discourage, Dismiss, Disqualify? – AI in School Applications: The Question Nobody Can Answer
Yesterday at Eton College, a room full of school leaders, admissions professionals, and educational consultants gathered to look at great British Education under the light of the data presented throughout the day; both eye-opening and reassuring. Much of it confirmed what many of us have already been observing across the sector. Yet one topic surfaced quietly, which for some time has appeared repeatedly in conversations. It was, yes! Artificial Intelligence.
Not whether students are using it. Not whether it has entered the admissions process yet. But what schools should actually do about it. The question is whether we know how to respond.
Some argue that AI should be actively discouraged. After all, admissions processes are designed to help schools understand the individual behind the application. If technology is creating responses on behalf of a student, does that undermine authenticity?
Others suggest that attempting to eliminate AI use entirely may be unrealistic. Today’s students are growing up in a world where these tools are their search engines like our google. If AI becomes part of everyday life and future workplaces, should schools not be assessing how students use it rather than whether they use it at all?
As a consultant, increasingly, I find ourselves having conversations about doing the application together, writing their PS, college essays together by sharing a screen in a tuition format, as I am never sure that they will use AI responsibly. My intervention and effort to work on it together, saves all parties time. but this is not sustainable, at least on my part. I cannot be teaching each and every one of my students this. Schools ought to hold ps sessions too because families want guidance, students want clarity and at the same time schools want fairness.
Yet there is currently no universally accepted framework or any effort to teach students how to. But everyone at Eton was asking the same questions
Admissions teams are asking what to do if they detect the use of AI, should they disqualify? School leaders are asking how they can preserve integrity without creating unnecessary barriers, should AI be dismissed?
Consultants are asking how they can support students ethically discourage the use, the way I do?
Parents are asking where the line should be drawn.
In many ways, the sector is experiencing a moment similar to the use of internet in research assignments. New technologies challenge established processes long before institutions develop consensus around best practice. The difference today is the speed at which change is happening.
Rather than focusing solely on detection, perhaps the conversation should shift towards defining what authenticity should look like in an AI-enabled world. Schools have always sought qualities such as creativity, and independent thinking. Those qualities remain just as valuable today as they were before AI emerged, so why not work those more?
If the students can demonstrate ownership of their ideas, present their mindset, and engage meaningfully with the work they submit they will own strongest applications ever.
As I left Eton, one thing became clear. The education sector has recognised that AI is here.What remains uncertain is how we respond. And perhaps that is the most important admissions conversation we need to have over the next few years. But years are too long, maybe months.
I would be interested to hear how school leaders, admissions teams, parents, and fellow consultants are approaching this challenge. do we detect it already? Are we trying to discourage AI, do we dismiss it, do we disqualify it? I reckon we should define and uphold authenticity while embracing AI. There is no distancing oneself from it.
