Universities push for AI firms to be more transparent on costs

Education providers have urged artificial intelligence companies to be more transparent over costs and governance as their products become more widely used by staff and students.

A sector-wide UK statement, published on 27 October and backed by the likes of Universities UK (UUK) and Guild HE, says that, for institutions to make long-term decisions about their investment in the rapidly developing technology, private enterprise and the education sector must work together to draw up “commercial and governance foundations”.

Organised by sector IT body Jisc, the “call to suppliers” aims to open up a new conversation on how institutions including universities, specialist institutions and research organisations interact with AI.

Where much discussion has focused on how AI might impact learning and assessment, or questions around the environmental impact, the statement suggests sustainable financial adoption must also be a consideration.

It outlines six “areas of expectation” for AI companies engaging with the sector and asks that they become standard procedure when it comes to contract and procurement negotiations.

“To make informed decisions, institutions must be able to understand how AI is being used, forecast costs, assess risks, demonstrate value and retain appropriate choice and control,” it says.

The demands include the guarantee of transparency at the point of signing a contract, protecting “value over time” when it comes to honouring that agreement.

“Suppliers must provide clear and complete information on service entitlements, pricing structures, usage metrics, charging mechanisms and usage models,” it says.

“Institutions need to understand how AI services are consumed, how costs are generated and how common teaching, research and operational workloads will translate into expenditure.”

In addition, Jisc wants to see technology suppliers provide granular data on how their services are being operated, in order for institutions to manage budgets and prevent “uncontrolled cost escalation”.

Providers want greater visibility over how AI services are priced, how usage is measured, how costs may change over time, and how suppliers manage issues such as model changes, governance, data controls and interoperability.

“In some teaching, research and operational contexts, continuity of access to a specific model version may be necessary to support consistency, governance and reproducibility,” the statement explains.

“Institutions should be able to adapt to technological change without unnecessary disruption, additional cost or supplier lock-in.”

The signatories conclude their call to suppliers by urging collaboration on the issue.

“We invite suppliers to work with the sector to develop commercial models that support innovation while providing the transparency, control and accountability required for sustainable adoption at scale,” it states.

Caren Milloy, director of licensing at Jisc, said: “AI is rapidly becoming part of the fabric of teaching, learning, research and operations.

“As adoption scales, institutions need confidence that they remain in control of their costs, choices and risks. By setting out shared expectations for suppliers, we want to create the transparency, accountability and commercial foundations that will enable universities and colleges to embrace AI sustainably and with confidence.”

georgia.luckhurst@timeshighereducation.com