Brown Professor Exposes Mass AI Cheating Ring — University Stayed Silent Until Story Went Viral

Clear Facts

• Brown University economics professor Roberto Serrano discovered massive AI cheating after switching to online exams, with average scores jumping from 65-80 to 96, and 40 students achieving perfect scores
• When the final exam returned to in-person format, 27 students dropped the course — 22 of them had received perfect scores on the midterm
• Brown University only began investigating after the professor went public with his findings months later, despite receiving evidence in May

A Brown University economics professor is speaking out against his institution’s delayed response to what he describes as a systematic artificial intelligence cheating scandal that compromised the integrity of an entire course.

Professor Roberto Serrano detailed his experience in an op-ed for The Free Press, explaining how a decision to move exams online following a deadly campus shooting in December created an unexpected window into widespread academic dishonesty. His course enrollment surged to 86 students, nearly triple the previous record of 30.

The results of the online midterm raised immediate red flags. The average grade skyrocketed to 96, compared to the typical range of 65 to 80 in previous years.

Forty students achieved perfect scores, and many answers bore striking similarities to ChatGPT-generated responses.

Serrano took decisive action, announcing that the final exam would return to an in-person format and that midterm scores would be voided if they didn’t align with final exam performance. The results were telling: only 59 students showed up for the final, with an average score plummeting to 48.6.

The pattern was unmistakable. Of the 27 students who dropped the course rather than take the in-person final, 22 had received perfect scores on the midterm.

Despite providing comprehensive evidence to Brown University’s Committee on the Academic Code and the campus newspaper in the spring, Serrano received no acknowledgment from the school until his story gained national attention months later.

“Academia is supposed to be one of our great beacons of truth. We cannot afford to tolerate or reinforce such appallingly low moral values among many of our best young minds. What happened in my class should be a lesson to all: In our new AI era, if you do not expose and punish cheating, you will encourage it. We must all have the strength to choose otherwise.”

Brown University responded to Fox News Digital with a statement claiming it has been “consistently responsive” to Serrano’s concerns.

“Multiple academic leaders from Brown were in touch in May 2026 with the professor to provide details about how the allegations raised could be formally adjudicated. On July 8, the professor provided the necessary details to the Standing Committee on the Academic Code to pursue this path toward resolution. With the required information now in hand, the committee is now moving forward according to its procedures,” the statement read.

The timeline tells a different story. Serrano originally shared his findings with El Pais on June 28.

Three days later, he received his first contact from the Brown University committee requesting additional evidence. It wasn’t until his story was covered by Inside Higher Ed last week that the school committed to a formal investigation.

“I am very grateful that they finally took this step. But there is no doubt in my mind that nothing would have happened if I had not decided to go public. Brown, like other schools, is struggling with how to integrate AI so that it advances rather than compromises the university’s mission.”

Serrano dismissed suggestions that students were using AI to cope with academic pressure.

“A competitive environment has existed in society since the dawn of civilization. There is no plausible reason to use it as a cheap excuse for cheating. Moreover, my midterm exam gave students virtually unlimited time. They were not using AI as a last resort to handle immense pressure; they were engaging in a deliberate act of cheating — in some cases, to take their grade all the way to 100 percent.”

The professor emphasized that universities must adapt to the reality of AI-enabled cheating with stronger accountability measures.

“Of course, we cannot be so naive as to think that people are never going to cheat when given the opportunity. Particularly these days, AI has dramatically reduced the difficulty of cheating, making it much easier to succumb to the temptation to do so. The only solution, then, is to impose the right incentives to influence behavior in a better direction.”

The case raises serious questions about how America’s elite institutions are addressing the challenge of artificial intelligence in education. As technology makes dishonesty easier than ever, the strength of institutional responses will determine whether academic integrity survives in the digital age.

Let us know what you think, please share your thoughts in the comments below.