Welcome back to the Academic Integrity Speaker Series II – the first of the 2024!
We kick off with Prof Michael Draper, a lawyer with an interest in Gen AI, assessments, and academic integrity.
Generative AI has spurred changes in assessment practices, raising concerns about its impact on education fraud.
Despite advancements, essay mills persist with intensified marketing, exploiting potential disruptions by reaching students through social media platforms.
The erosion of trust among students, as personal details are traded for perks, complicates collaborative efforts, especially in group assessments.
Join us as we look at the impact of GenAI on academic misconduct and discuss what is really going on.
Free flow discussion, Chatham House Rules apply.
31st Jan 2024
12 – 1 pm GMT online
To join the meeting, you will need a Zoom Account.
Join the webinar by booking a place.
Generative Al has been the catalyst for assessment change but what impact has this had on Education Fraud, if any?
Essay Mills have not gone away and their marketing has become more aggressive as the potential for Gen AI disrupts their business model.
Students receive Instagram messages asking if they are studying at a given University with essay mills obtaining students personal details, including mobile phone numbers. Their peers are also likely giving away this information to them in return for reduced prices or enhanced support. Such student activity might erode trust and collaboration between students precisely when group work is seen as a way forward in assessment.
Assessments designed to prevent fraud or use of Gen AI are varied but often suit smaller cohorts unless assessments seek to minimize workload through programme level assessment of learning outcomes. Some of the assessments proposed to address Gen AI may not scale so a return to invigilated examinations is occurring. Is this a progressive response? Continued advertising encouraging fraudulent activity suggests that the pace of assessment change is either slow or happening in pockets without strategic change at programme level. Is this a fair observation?