Prevention against punishment
However, even if there are clear AI guidelines, There are students who try to use tools and software to avoid rules.
For example, students can use “Humanising” software to impersonate AI-generated assignments into bypass detection software. With current technology, students may also use AI tools in oral exams, as such apps reside on mobile phones and allow students to communicate wirelessly via modest earpieces.
Rather than playing detectives, institutions should focus on prevention through clear communication. This means writing a clear AI policy with a concrete example.
Other prevention strategies include AI literacy training for faculty and students, redesigning assessments that focus more on the process than answers, and verifying student understandings through conversation assessments and in-class discussions.
Universities can also consider a “AI transparent” approach in which students document the use of AI tools across assignments, similar to traditional methods of citing sources. This creates accountability on the part of students, while avoiding the hostile effects of detection-based enforcement.
Clear AI guidelines protect the value of university degrees and prepare students for an AI-driven future. They help students develop ethical instincts, emotional intelligence and creative thinking. Human skills that AI cannot replace.
University Graduates may work with AI tools and apps throughout their careers. The problem with the university is not to tackle excessive reliance on AI or ban it completely, but to teach students how Working with AI responsibly.
Clear and transparent guidelines allow universities to maintain the integrity of their education while preparing students for the world of Ai-hanced.
Dr. Caroline Wong is Associate Dean of Education and Learning, and Associate Professor of Business, and Harry Kras is a Senior Learning Technology Specialist at James Cook University (Singapore Campus).
