Surrey redesigns all degrees to embed ‘discipline-specific’ AI

The University of Surrey has undertaken a major redraft of its curriculum and assessments to introduce discipline-specific artificial intelligence (AI) into all of its courses from September. 

Surrey said it has attempted a “systematic redesign of every degree programme” to “embed” AI into its curriculum, in what it claims is a first for the sector. The redesign will apply to all students, even those who have already started their studies at Surrey.

As part of the process, it has also transformed its assessment structure, moving towards assessing students’ process over their outputs, it said.

Surrey believes that its new discipline-specific approach sets it apart from the rest of the sector. “What we didn’t want to do was just create one AI skills module somewhere that students could take on an extracurricular basis if they wanted to,” said Annika Bautz, pro vice-chancellor for education at the University of Surrey.

“That’s helpful, but it’ll only tell you about very generic skills, which are useful and they might help for generic tasks. But it isn’t really getting students to understand the impact of AI on their discipline.”

AI will be at the core of some exercises. For example, politics students in a course on voting behaviour will be told to choose an election and ask ChatGPT to explain the results.

Students will then have to interrogate the accuracy of the AI’s response, testing it against established theories of political behaviour, as well as data sets from the British Election Study and published academic research.

Third-year civil engineering students will be asked to use AI to help them design a six-storey hotel, following standard practices currently being used in industry. Every AI output will then be verified against hand calculations and modelling.

The redesign also includes the requirement for students to consider the impact of AI on their discipline, whether legal changes or ethical considerations. Creative writing and music students need to understand what AI means for intellectual property and ownership issues, Bautz said.

“AI is disrupting different subjects and sectors in different ways, so students need to understand what the future of their discipline looks like,” she said.

Assessments have also been reviewed, with Bautz describing the transformation as a “major piece of work”. 

The university will continue to use a mix of assessment methods but there will now be a greater focus on assessing the “process” of students’ work, rather than simply the “output”, she said.

For example, students studying English literature will continue to submit essays but might also have to submit examples of annotated, close-reading extracts formed throughout the essay-writing process, draft paragraphs showing shifts in their argument, and peer feedback notes and revision memos.

Meanwhile, in a theatre module where students are required to prepare a solo or ensemble performance, they might also have to submit a “reflective development portfolio charting the creative process”.

This could include rehearsal journal entries, including abandoned choices or failed experiments, or clips from early and later rehearsals with commentary explaining how they evolved. 

Although this might seem like a radical shift, Bautz said academic disciplines remain at the heart of any decisions taken.

“It is a major technology shift but what I keep coming back to is: we are still teaching the subject. AI isn’t everything. It is still going to be about the main subject and the skills that students need to understand that. 

“It’s still really going to be about developing critical skills, developing all the kinds of graduate competencies that you want to develop, it’s just now that includes skills to do with AI but that won’t replace the massive pool of skills that we’re already teaching.”

 juliette.rowsell@timeshighereducation.com