The increasing prevalence of artificial intelligence in education is prompting schools and universities to reevaluate their approaches to assignments and examinations. With AI tools like ChatGPT becoming commonplace, students can effortlessly generate essays, solve complex equations, or draft lab reports, raising critical questions about the nature of authentic learning in 2025. In response, some educational institutions are reverting to traditional methods by reintroducing handwritten exams using the “blue book,” a lined booklet for writing test answers. This approach, highlighted by The Wall Street Journal, is seen as an effective measure to ensure students complete their work independently.

Recent surveys indicate that up to 89% of students have utilized AI tools such as ChatGPT for coursework assistance. While some use these tools for brainstorming or grammar corrections, others rely on them for writing entire papers or completing take-home tests. This surge in academic dishonesty has left faculty members striving to maintain academic standards. Although detection software like Turnitin’s AI writing checker is increasingly used, these systems are not foolproof, and many incidents remain undetected.

The challenge lies in the sophistication of generative AI, which can mimic human writing styles and even match a student’s previous work. This makes plagiarism detection difficult without advanced forensic techniques or human intuition. In blind tests, educators often struggle to differentiate between human and AI-generated responses. Some schools have even abandoned detection software due to concerns over accuracy and privacy.

To combat this issue, more professors are opting for in-class handwritten exams. Institutions such as Texas A&M, the University of Florida, and UC Berkeley have reported increased demand for blue books over the past two years. The rationale is straightforward: if students write essays by hand during class, they cannot rely on AI tools like ChatGPT. This shift is not just nostalgic but strategic, as handwritten exams are harder to manipulate and may enhance student thinking without digital shortcuts.

However, critics argue that timed in-class writing may limit students’ development of research skills and analytical thinking, especially for complex topics requiring time and revision. Blue books also do not address AI misuse in homework or group projects. Some educators advocate for a balanced approach by integrating AI literacy into curricula, teaching students how to use these tools responsibly and distinguishing between inspiration and plagiarism.

As AI continues to evolve, so must educational strategies to ensure honest learning. Some schools are exploring oral exams or process-based assignments that make cheating more difficult. While there is no single solution, it is evident that the education system must adapt quickly to maintain credibility in an age where AI can perform many academic tasks.