Building on our 2024 AI Survey, we surveyed 1,041 full-time undergraduate students through Savanta about their use of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) tools.
In 2025, we find that the student use of AI has surged in the last year, with almost all students (92%) now using AI in some form, up from 66% in 2024, and some 88% having used GenAI for assessments, up from 53% in 2024. The main uses of GenAI are explaining concepts, summarising articles and suggesting research ideas, but a significant number of students – 18% – have included AI-generated text directly in their work.
When asked why they use AI, students most often find it saves them time and improves the quality of their work. The main factors putting them off using AI are the risk of being accused of academic misconduct and the fear of getting false or biased results. Women are more worried about these factors than men, and men report more enthusiasm for AI throughout the survey, as do wealthier students and those on STEM courses. The digital divide we identified in 2024 appears to have widened.
Institutions have maintained a good record on protecting the integrity of assessments, with 80% agreeing their institution has a clear AI policy and 76% saying their institution would spot the use of AI in assessed work – both increases from the 2024 Survey. However, while students overwhelmingly believe it is essential to have good AI skills, only 36% have received support from their institution to develop them. The gap has grown between the number saying they want AI tools to be provided and the number saying AI tools currently are provided. However, staff literacy has increased, with 42% of students suggesting staff are ‘well-equipped’ to help them with AI, compared with just 18% in 2024.
In new questions for 2025, we found that just under half (45%) of students had used AI while at school, and more students agree AI-generated content would get a good grade in their subject (40%) than disagree (34%). But they are lukewarm about the possibility of exams assessed by AI: 34% would put in more effort against 29% who would put in less effort and 27% whose effort would not change.
Based on these findings, we recommend that institutions keep their assessment practices under constant review, particularly as AI becomes more powerful and students become more proficient with AI tools, requiring staff to be supported to improve their AI literacy. However, institutions should not adopt a mainly punitive approach; instead, their AI policies should reflect that AI use by students is inevitable and often beneficial. Institutions should share best practice and work together to design effective teaching and learning strategies.
I would like to get regular updates.