Blue Books Won’t Save Us: What AI Is Really Asking of Assessment in Higher Ed

Apr 3

by Claire L. Brady, EdD

There’s a growing instinct across higher education right now: if AI is making it easier for students to generate work, then the answer must be to go backward.

More proctored exams.
More in-person testing.
More blue books.

The recent Inside Higher Ed article “Blue Books Are Not the Answer to AI” by Armando Fox and Craig Zilles challenges that instinct—and I would argue it’s an essential read for institutional leaders navigating this moment.

Because while the concern is valid, the solution is misaligned. This is not a problem we solve by going backward. It’s one we solve by getting smarter about how we move forward.

The False Comfort of “Going Back”

Blue books feel safe. They represent control, containment, and a version of academic integrity that feels familiar. But let’s be honest: they are also a blunt instrument. They limit what we can assess. They privilege speed over depth. They often measure recall more than application. And perhaps most importantly—they are out of sync with the world we are preparing students to enter. AI didn’t create that gap. It exposed it.

The Real Opportunity: Better, Not Just Safer, Assessment

Fox and Zilles make a compelling case that computer-based testing—when done well—is not just a workaround for AI. It’s a fundamentally better model.

Because when assessment moves into a digital environment, something powerful happens:

We expand what’s possible.

Students can interact with data, not just describe it
They can analyze visuals, simulations, and real-world scenarios
They can write, code, model, and problem-solve in authentic ways
They can demonstrate learning in formats that mirror professional practice

This is the shift we should be paying attention to: from static assessment → to dynamic demonstration of learning

AI Changes the Rules—But Not the Goal

The goal has never been to prevent students from accessing tools. The goal is to understand what they know, how they think, and how they apply it.

AI complicates that—but it also clarifies something important. If a task can be easily completed by AI, we should be asking: Was that the right task to begin with? This is where many institutions are still stuck. We are trying to protect assessments that were already fragile. Instead of redesigning them to be more meaningful.

Integrity Is a Design Problem

One of the most compelling ideas in the article is the use of unique, generated exams. Not identical tests administered at scale—but equivalent assessments tailored to each student.

This does two things: 1) It reduces the incentive (and ability) to share answers and 2) it shifts the focus back to individual understanding

Layer in:

Controlled testing environments
Trained proctors
Secure systems

And suddenly, integrity is not about restriction. It’s about design.

What Leaders Should Be Asking Right Now

This is not just a faculty conversation. This is a leadership conversation.

Because the move toward more sophisticated, scalable assessment requires:

Investment in infrastructure
Cross-campus coordination
Clear institutional strategy
A willingness to rethink long-standing practices

Here are three questions worth bringing to your next leadership meeting:

1. Are our assessments aligned with the skills we say we value?

Or are we still measuring what’s easiest to grade?

2. Are we designing for integrity—or trying to enforce it after the fact?

Those are very different approaches.

3. Are we building systems that scale—or asking faculty to solve this individually?

This is where many institutions are falling short.

The Bigger Leadership Moment

Blue books are not the answer.

But the deeper truth is this: Neither is simply adding more technology. The real work is redesign. Rethinking what it means to demonstrate learning in an AI-enabled world. Reimagining assessment as something more authentic, more flexible, and more aligned with real-world application.

AI is not breaking higher education. It is pressuring us to evolve. And in moments like this, leadership is not about restoring the past. It’s about building what comes next—with intention.

Read the full IHE article here: https://www.insidehighered.com/opinion/views/2026/03/19/blue-books-are-not-answer-ai-opinion