Is using AI at university really different from using AI in the workplace?

I keep seeing arguments that using AI for university work is “cheating,” but in most professional environments, using AI tools is increasingly normal — even encouraged.

In the workplace, efficiency matters. If you can use AI to draft reports, summarise data, structure proposals, or refine communication, that’s often seen as productivity, not misconduct. So why is the standard so different in academia?

I understand the core argument: university is supposed to assess individual learning and cognitive development. If AI does too much of the thinking, then the assessment no longer measures the student’s capability. That makes sense in principle.

But at the same time, if higher education is meant to prepare people for the labour market, and the labour market uses AI, shouldn’t students be trained to use it responsibly rather than being discouraged from touching it at all?

Maybe the real issue isn’t AI use itself, but transparency and boundaries. Where is the line between legitimate assistance and undermining the purpose of assessment?

Curious how others see it — is the academic context fundamentally different, or are universities just lagging behind real-world practice?