Guarding Academic Integrity: A Teacher's Quixotic Battle Against AI

When a survey by??Education Week?(1) revealed that only 2% of teachers use AI tools 'a lot' and 37% 'have never used it and have no plans to start,' I believed them!???

Despite the buzz in LinkedIn circles, the reality strikes differently: most active secondary school teachers aren't welcoming generative AI with open arms. No matter the specific AI benefit I over-zealously share either on social media or in the staffroom, the conversation invariably circles back to the same issue:???

?

'My students only use it to cheat on their homework; it's a disgrace!'???

If I engage further, it inevitably leads to the accusatory question,???

'How do YOU prevent cheating on your homework?'??

My response has always been consistent: 'I can't - but I never could.'??

??

Cheating is a Fundamental Issue.??

?

?I trained as a teacher in the UK, but common to teacher training in all countries, I imagine, was a core focus on how to inspire teenagers to love the subject and value academic success. Whether we like it or not, currently, achieving success requires considerable effort. If the value of academic success is downplayed, students simply won't invest the necessary effort to pass, let alone excel. Having the students and their parents on board with this notion is crucial.???

I would, therefore, argue that being even halfway decent at doing what I was taught to do inadvertently inspires students to cheat, and cheating is exactly what many children will do when given half the chance. What's more, their parents will help them do it! And they always have!???

?

"The message to children and adolescents seems clear—material success comes before moral integrity. Cheating on a test may be a small price to pay if it helps securing admittance into a prestigious college or university. It is not surprising, therefore, that pressure for grades is often the primary reason students cite for cheating." (2)??

?

Below are just a few of the many ways in which students routinely compromise their academic integrity.?(3)????

• Copying Among Peers:?(Students copy from each other; they always have, and they always will!)?
• Assistance from Family and Friends?
• Utilisation of Private Tutors:?(Private tutoring, especially online, is booming, with its market valued at USD 6.75 billion in 2021 and predicted to surge by 14% annually)??
• Reliance on the Internet:?(Offering endless resources for plagiarism and 'essay writers' ready to covertly complete assignments for a fee.)?????? ?

If you believe society's deep-rooted belief in equality would or should prevent such practices, I would encourage you to question why the business of running private educational establishments is so lucrative. Many parents will do everything they possibly can to give their children the academic edge.??

?

Generative AI isn't Any Worse or More Unfair.??

Some teachers may claim they can catch all these methods of cheating. However, I would argue that they only catch those students who are inept at it, and?if you can catch the adept ones, you will have no problem detecting work generated by ChatGPT. Other teachers contend that the real issue is the speed and ease with which students can cheat using generative AI. Yet, again, I would argue that for those few fortunate enough to have parents who can afford tutoring, the ease of cheating is nothing new.???

?

What is new, however, at my international school in Spain, where most parents don't speak English and therefore are entirely unable to help with any school work, is that the ability for pupils to get at least some help with their homework is now available to all, not just to those lucky enough to have parents who can afford to pay for a private tutor. This marginal reduction in inequality I can only view as positive.??

?

'Reducing the effect of family background on children's education is a pivotal aim of educators, policymakers, and researchers' (3)??

?

Prevent Cheating by Removing the Incentive to Cheat? ?

??

In the UK system, the barriers to academic integrity have?been recognised long ago, and the solution is relatively simple at the teacher level. Unlike in the Spanish or American education system I am able to entirely position and present myself as my students' ally, not their judge. I view my teaching role as purely formative and I can leave all formal summative assessments to external parties. The real adversary for my students are the evil external high-stakes summative exams of I/GCSE and A-levels that we must fight together to collaboratively overcome.??(4)

??

???

Homework is, therefore, purely formative, for learning and improvement so they are free to use tutors, classmates and ChatGPT to their heart's content. Naturally, I provide feedback and occasional effort grades, but I don't attach significant importance to these grades, so there is no benefit to students in using?these tools to trick me.???

?

I find that if you remind students and parents of this fact enough, they are fully capable of understanding that shortcuts only lead to less personalised assistance, losing a supportive ally, and underperforming in the all-important summative exam that I am not allowed to set, attend or mark.???

?

When students these days submit work to me that is clearly written entirely by ChatGPT, I laugh rather than accuse and simply query whether they would gain anything from me reviewing it. So far, every student has requested an extension, and then completed the work themselves. Do I 'catch' every student? Certainly not. However, those that get past me gain only disadvantages rather than advantages, so, as I frequently remind my classes, that makes them 'fools, not cheats.'???

?

I view my teaching role as purely formative and I can leave all formal summative assessments to external parties.?

?

The Summative Assessment Problem???

?

So how do external exam boards, whose job it is to summarise children's abilities, ensure academic integrity? Well, to be frank, thankfully, that is not the everyday teacher's problem to solve, which is fantastic as it might be a topic even more divisive than Generative AI. (Just look at what is happening in Australia currently.)??

?

However, in the UK system, summative assessment, much to the disgust of some, only takes place in the very strictest and draconian exam conditions. Coursework has largely been phased out, with the primary reason being that they can't guarantee authenticity. Summative exams are a hugely costly, labour-intensive process that involves: sealed exam packs, secure safes, external invigilators, synchronised exam times, standardised rules, and spot checks on schools. These methods are far beyond what any teacher could realistically employ regularly. We may not like them, but we can at least say that categorically AI cannot be used to cheat in these exams.??

?

In the U.K.' Exam boards charge more than ￡400 million per year in fees, while at least ￡300 million is spent on invigilators and other staff to manage the tests in schools. '(5)??

?

?Conclusion???

?So, are teachers justified in their concern about students using AI to cheat? Absolutely. AI detectors have been proven to be not fit for purpose, so there is currently no foolproof method to guarantee academic honesty outside of strict exam conditions. This creates a huge problem for educational programmes that still have summative assessments with elements completed outside of test conditions. The International Baccalaureate (IB), for example, which has 'Internal Assessments' and 'Extended Essays' form a large part of the student's final grades and are written entirely unsupervised and protected only by their 'academic integrity policy,' have a lot of head-scratching to do.???

?

?I don't envy their position; however, ironically, I think it might be an unlikely source that provides them with their definitive answer. While the frontpage of the AI detection website Turnitin boldly claims they 'Empower students to do their best “original work”,' hidden away on a subpage comes the reality of the situation.??

References??

(1) https://www.edweek.org/technology/teachers-told-us-theyve-used-ai-in-the-classroom-heres-why/2024/01??

?

(2) Tamera B. Murdock, Jason M. Stephens,10 - Is Cheating Wrong? Students' Reasoning about Academic Dishonesty,Psychology of Academic Cheating,Academic Press,2007,Pages 229-251,ISBN 9780123725417,???

https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-012372541-7/50014-0.??

?

(https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B9780123725417500140)??

?

(3) von Stumm, S., Cave, S.N. & Wakeling, P. Persistent association between family socioeconomic status and primary school performance in Britain over 95 years. npj Sci. Learn. 7, 4 (2022).?https://doi.org/10.1038/s41539-022-00120-3??

?

(4) Harlen, W., & James, M. (1997). Assessment and Learning: differences and relationships between formative and summative assessment.?Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 4, 365-379.?https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594970040304.

?

(5)?https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/ps700m-spent-on-exams-every-year-6682009.html??