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 lectures and replaced them with an AI chatbot, online quizzes, and optional tutorials that 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, a text-based AI tool students type questions to and receive automated responses from, asks students questions and walks them through scenario-based exercises. Think of it as a digital study partner programmed to quiz you, except it never pushes back the way a real peer or lecturer might.

What exactly changed for students?

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

That is a meaningful shift. Psychology is a discipline built around understanding people. Critics argue that removing live human interaction from its teaching is a contradiction.

Are lecturers worried?

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

The concern is not unique to Macquarie. Universities in several countries have been quietly folding AI tools into teaching to reduce costs. The question critics are raising is where the line sits between using AI as a helpful supplement and using it as a straight replacement for human staff.

What should students and parents watch for?

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

Ask the institution directly: is a human available if the AI gives unclear guidance? What happens when a student is struggling emotionally, a common reality in psychology courses, and the only resource available is a chatbot?

None of this means AI tools in education are automatically bad. Used well, they can give students extra practice time and instant feedback outside of class hours. The problem comes when they replace contact with real teachers rather than adding to it.

For now, Macquarie's experiment is live and students are enrolled. Whether other universities follow, and how quickly, depends partly on whether this one draws enough scrutiny to slow the trend down.

Common questions

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

In most countries, universities set their own course formats and are generally free to change how subjects are delivered, 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 be, particularly for revision and practice outside class hours. The concern here is not the tool itself but the removal of the human teaching it was meant to support.