Australian University Replaces Psychology Classes With an AI Chatbot

Key points

• Macquarie University, based in Sydney, has replaced in-person classes with an AI chatbot called 'Virtual Peer' in two compulsory psychology subjects.
• The AI tool asks students questions and guides them through scenario exercises each week, replacing face-to-face teaching time.
• In-person tutorials still exist but are now optional, not required.
• Critics inside academia warn the move is part of a broader trend that could lead to staff cuts and erode teaching quality.

An Australian university has quietly swapped out in-person psychology classes and replaced them with an AI chatbot, online quizzes and tutorials students no longer have to attend.

Macquarie University in Sydney introduced a tool called "Virtual Peer" into two mandatory first-year psychology subjects. Each week, the chatbot asks students questions and walks them through scenario-based exercises. It never pushes back the way a real peer or lecturer would.

What exactly changed for students?

In-person classes in these two subjects are gone. Tutorials, the smaller group sessions where students traditionally discuss and debate ideas with a teacher, are still available but optional. A student could complete the subject without ever speaking to another human being.

Psychology is a discipline built around understanding people. Removing live human interaction from its teaching isn't just a logistical change; it's a philosophical one.

When we first covered Macquarie University on 1 September 2026, the institution was already navigating pressure over how AI fits into academic life. This move is a sharper step.

Are lecturers worried?

Yes, and they're saying so publicly. Academics quoted by The Guardian described the move as part of a growing trend across higher education, one they believe will cost teaching jobs and strip away what they called "everything that makes the job worth doing."

The concern isn't unique to Macquarie. Universities in several countries have been folding AI into teaching to reduce costs. The question is where the line sits between a helpful supplement and a straight replacement for human staff. Our August reporting on mathematicians questioning their own professional value after an OpenAI breakthrough shows how quickly that question moves across disciplines.

Should you worry about this?

If you or someone you know is starting university soon, check the actual format of your subjects before enrolling. Look for whether tutorials are listed as compulsory or optional, and whether any teaching has been handed to an automated system.

Ask the institution directly whether a human is available when the AI gives unclear guidance. What happens when a student is struggling emotionally, a common reality in psychology courses, and the only resource on offer is a chatbot? That's the version of this story nobody's answered yet.

AI tools in education aren't automatically harmful. Used well, they give students extra practice and instant feedback outside class hours. The problem arrives when they replace contact with real teachers rather than adding to it. Bruce Schneier's point, which we reported on 24 July 2026, applies here: letting AI do the cognitive work for you can hollow out the very skill you're paying to develop.

For now, Macquarie's experiment is live. Whether other universities follow depends partly on how much scrutiny this one attracts.

Common questions

Is this legal? Can universities just remove in-person classes?

In most countries, universities set their own course formats and are free to change delivery, provided the overall learning outcomes remain the same. Whether a chatbot meets that standard is exactly what critics are now challenging.

Could AI tutors actually be useful for students?

They can, particularly for revision outside class hours. The concern here isn't the tool itself but the removal of the human teaching it was meant to support.