GenAI and Student Academic Integrity

Guidance for teaching staff on students’ use of genAI

It’s important to have open discussions with students—before they submit work—on the ethical use of genAI and on the University’s requirements around its use in assessment tasks. Key information for students is captured in the ‘Guidance for students on the use of genAI’ section below.

Subject coordinators may also consider reviewing assessment task design in the context of genAI as captured in the ‘GenAI and assessment’ section above. The BEL+T team are available to provide support. Please reach out to us at abp-belt@unimelb.edu.au to discuss.

For use once students have submitted work, an AI writing detection tool has been integrated into Turnitin, and is being further refined through its use at the University. Learning Environments has produced comprehensive information on the reliability of the tool, its functionality, and what to do if the tool returns a high percentage of text flagged as likely to have been AI-written. Note that:

As with the Turnitin similarity report, a high percentage of text flagged as likely to have been AI-written is not proof that academic misconduct has taken place but may be a sign that further investigation is warranted. Academic judgement should be used to determine whether to investigate the matter further, including by discussing with the student.

Investigations of such cases may look for additional evidence that the assessment material submitted was completed by the student, on the balance of probabilities. This might include looking at the metadata of the files submitted, comparing the assessment to other work completed by the same student, asking the student to provide drafts of the work, to describe how they completed it, or to explain the content of the assignment. Such evidence, taken together, may allow committees to come to a judgement about whether or not the work in question is likely to be the students’ own writing.

As with all potential student academic misconduct, subject coordinators are the main point of contact. Staff should not accuse students of academic misconduct, but should seek more information where appropriate, and gather evidence. Steps for identifying and responding to potential academic misconduct for investigation are outlined via BEL+T’s Academic Integrity Guidance. Please also refer to the links to Academic Misconduct on the ABP Faculty Intranet.

If a student is found to have committed academic misconduct by representing work generated by artificial intelligence software as their own, they will be subject to the penalties outlined in the Schedule of Student Academic Misconduct Penalties.

For guidance on those investigations and on their possible outcomes, please reach out to the ABP Student Programs team at abp-misconduct@unimelb.edu.au. Even if the outcome involves an educative approach—which may be suitable in some initial cases—please keep the ABP Student Programs team in the loop, so that the Faculty can maintain a comprehensive record of engagement with each student.

Guidance for students on the use of genAI

Per the University’s Advice for Students Regarding Turnitin and AI Writing Detection:

The acceptable use of AI will vary across disciplines, subjects, and assessment tasks. Your subject coordinator will provide this information, but it is your responsibility to check the assessment guidelines and relevant policies, and to understand what is expected of you. Resources on academic integrity are available to you through your subject’s LMS site, Academic Skills, and the Library.

If an assessment task does permit the use of AI tools and technologies in the preparation of the submission, this usage must be appropriately acknowledged and cited in accordance with the Assessment and Results Policy (MPF1326).

If an assessment task does not permit the use of such tools, or if you use such tools in the preparation of an assessment submission without acknowledgement, this is academic misconduct. In accordance with the Student Academic Integrity Policy (MPF1310), any student who commits academic misconduct is subject to the penalties outlined in the Schedule of Student Academic Misconduct Penalties.

Teaching staff should please encourage students to review this advice (also reflected in the University’s 21/4/2023 Statement on the Use of Artificial Intelligence Software in the Preparation of Material for Assessment). Students should note that this advice applies to a variety of translation and editing tools beyond the common chat-based genAI tools. This document highlights the important role that subject coordinators play in clarifying the appropriate use—or not—of genAI tools for learning and assessment.