The rise of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) has not changed the definition of academic integrity or BCIT’s expectation of students. It has not created a new type of academic dishonesty or a new reason for academic dishonesty to occur. However, it may have increased the ease of dishonest behaviour, and it may have increased confusion as to what constitutes academic dishonesty. Let’s start with a quick review of what academic integrity is.
Academic integrity is honest, fair, respectful, and responsible behaviour in an academic environment. “BCIT supports and encourages integrity and ethical conduct in all areas of academic work, research and scholarship. Students are expected to conduct themselves with the highest level of academic integrity” (Academic Integrity at BCIT). BCIT has also implemented a Student Code of Academic Integrity.
Academic integrity is important for BCIT students because it
- encourages students to develop their knowledge and skills
- promotes fairness among students
- fosters the development of ethics and ethical behaviour in students
- protects the reputation of the Institute and the credentials earned by the students
Some common examples of academic dishonesty include
- submitting the work of others as one’s own (including work created by GenAI tools)
- other forms of plagiarism (including self/auto-plagiarism; poor paraphrasing)
- falsifying academic records
- submitting the same piece of work to different instructors without permission
- cheating on assessments (including consulting an AI tool during a closed book exam; copying from a friend’s test)
Some common reasons for academic dishonesty include
- not having enough time to complete a task honestly (poor time management)
- not having the ability or confidence to complete a task honestly
- not understanding the expectations of the use of GenAI for the task
- a lack of understanding of academic integrity and its importance (can be cultural)
- ease of dishonest behaviour due to the design of the task
- not understanding when it is acceptable to collaborate with peers on an assignment and when it is not
Students are already using GenAI for a wide range of purposes. Whether the use of GenAI constitutes academic dishonesty depends on the teacher’s instructions to students regarding its use. Therefore, instructors need to set clear expectations regarding when and how students
- may use AI tools
- may not use AI tools
- must acknowledge and cite the use of GenAI
These clear expectations should be included in course outlines, referred to throughout each term, and included in instructions for tests and assignments. BCIT provides instructors with guidance for GenAI statements on course outlines and assessment design that considers the appropriate use of GenAI. (See Design Assessment.)
| The skillful use of GenAI is likely to become (if it is not already) something that many employers desire in our BCIT grads. Completely preventing student use of GenAI is neither possible nor desirable. However, students need to understand that when employers want employees who can use GenAI, they want people with enough expertise to identify where the output of GenAI is lacking. Students who rely too much on GenAI to accomplish their assignments are unlikely to develop this expertise and be successful in their profession. This message needs to be communicated to students early and often by their instructors (role models who have already developed this expertise) and is a powerful way to encourage students to use GenAI responsibly. |
To foster academic integrity, particularly regarding GenAI, instructors should consider the reasons for academic dishonesty. Following a combination of the solutions outlined below will help to create a culture of academic integrity in your classes.
| Reason for Academic Dishonesty |
Solution |
| A student does not have enough time to complete a task honestly. | Provide frequent reminders of deadlines.
Break large assignments into stages and ask for segment submissions over the course of the term, rather than at the end. This allows you to monitor students’ progress and provide guidance. It also keeps tasks manageable and lowers the stakes by staging work and grades. Make clear to students how long a task is expected to take. Clearly explain to students what they should do if they are unable to complete the task on time. |
| A student does not have the ability or confidence to complete a task honestly. | Make clear to students the skills needed to complete the assignment.
Clearly explain to students what they should do if they are struggling with the task and provide frequent reminders of how and when to contact you for feedback and support. Identify support resources in the department/school/ BCIT. Provide a rubric. Provide a sample of the assignment. |
| A student does not understand the expectations of the use of GenAI for the task. | Make clear to students what level of use of GenAI (if any) is acceptable when completing any given task. (See Design Assessment.)
If some use of GenAI is acceptable, clearly explain the requirements for referencing or otherwise acknowledging the use of GenAI (including providing support with how to cite, such as a link to the BCIT Library Guide). If some use of GenAI is acceptable, require students to describe how they used AI (if at all) in the development of the assignment. Provide students with examples of acceptable and unacceptable use of GenAI. |
| A student does not understand academic integrity and its importance. | You may need to review the importance of academic integrity (and how it relates to GenAI) multiple times throughout a course, or even for each assignment. You should refer to it directly at least once when reviewing the statement in your course outline at the beginning of the term.
Remember that expectations regarding academic integrity (in general and specific to GenAI) vary from country to country. Never assume your expectations are “obvious.” |
| A student finds it easy to behave dishonestly due to the design of the task. (For example, dishonest behaviour regarding AI is less likely during an in-person paper-and-pencil exam or with an assignment where the use of AI tools is permitted.) | Consider the security of your assessment. How do you ensure that the work submitted is that of the student and not someone else or the product of AI?
Does your assessment allow students to apply knowledge to their own lives or professional context, or does it ask them to repeat information easily available online without applying it to a specific situation? Be sure to inform students of the purpose of the task. What program goals or course outcomes is it connected to? How will students benefit from completing the task honestly? |
| A student does not understand when it is acceptable to collaborate with peers on an assignment and when it is not. | Be clear about when and how group work is acceptable for a task and when and how it is not.
If the above recommendation is followed, students behaving dishonestly to help a struggling friend is less likely to be a problem. This issue can be included in discussions with students regarding the importance of academic integrity. |
At BCIT, appropriate use of GenAI for a given task is defined by the instructor. Here are some basic examples of what some instructors might consider to be appropriate use of GenAI, as well as examples of what might be considered violations of academic integrity.
| Academic Integrity Violation | Use of AI as a Learning Tool or Co-intelligence |
| A student provides ChatGPT with a detailed prompt and asks it to write their final paper. The student submits the paper with little or no editing. The student does not acknowledge the use of AI. | A student completes the readings and then drafts their final paper, applying concepts learned in class to a unique context, adding personal examples, and creating a reference list. The student uploads the paper to ChatGPT and asks it to make the text more concise to stay within the word limit. The student acknowledges AI editing of the text as per BCIT Library guidelines. |
| A student takes a paper published by an author in another language, asks CoPilot to translate it into English, and hands the translation in as their own work. | A student feels their ability to communicate ideas in their home language is stronger than in English. The student drafts their paper, mostly in English, but uses an AI translator tool to translate some of their own ideas from their first language into English. The student acknowledges this use of AI following guidelines provided by their instructor. |
| A group of students use AI to generate a project, or one student uses AI to generate their contribution to the group assignment. | A group of students use GenAI for brainstorming and creating a project plan. |
For more information on reasons for academic dishonesty and advice on how to reduce its occurrence, please see this review of relevant literature:
Miles, P. J., Campbell, M., & Ruxton, G. D. (2022). Why students cheat and how understanding this can help reduce the frequency of academic misconduct in higher education: A literature review. Journal of Undergraduate Neuroscience Education, 20(2), A150–A160. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10653228/
There is no reliable method of differentiating between text created by a human and text created by GenAI. Use of AI detection tools is prohibited at BCIT. They are unreliable and their use violates students’ rights.
Unreliable
There are no reliable tools for detecting AI-generated text. Both false positives (incorrectly identifying text written by a human as being created by AI) and false negatives (incorrectly identifying text created by AI as being written by a human) are common when using even the best detectors. Testing of 14 popular detectors of AI-generated text supported previous research that found “serious limitations of the state-of-the-art AI-generated text detection tools and their unsuitability for use as evidence of academic misconduct” (Weber-Wulf et al., 2023, p. 25).
Unethical
Instructors at BCIT are not permitted to upload student work to any internet-based tools without the students’ consent. “Uploading student personal information to an unvetted service may be a breach of British Columbia’s Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act. Additionally, it may be a violation of the Copyright Act as students own copyright of their work” (BCIT Library Guide).
Weber-Wulff, D., Anohina-Naumeca, A., Bjelobaba, S. et al. (2023). Testing of detection tools for AI-generated text. International Journal for Educational Integrity, 19(26), https://doi.org/10.1007/s40979-023-00146-z