In a comment on an earlier post, a professor suggested as a topic for discussion, “Academic integrity violations becoming commonplace (analog, not just AI!) and what to do about it.”
I’ve certainly heard from many professors about rampant AI-enabled cheating in their courses. Here’s one horror story from an instructor of an online course:
24 students started the course.
7 dropped on the first day immediately after being informed there would be in-person [live] Zoom oral exams. (You can draw your own conclusions about why….)
Of the 17 left, 4 handed in either nothing at all during the course, or at most one assignment (out of five). So, they failed.
That leaves 13 ‘active’ students.
Of these 13, I had to turn in 10 for cheating using AI – and of those 10, 3 continued to use AI to cheat after I had already turned them in for this (and informed them that I had done so). So, they got turned in again. And again. And again. And, in one case, again.
So, of the original 24 students, only 3 did the work required in the course, and did so honestly.
That may be an extreme example, but even some professors teaching in-person courses, including those who have taken steps to reduce the incentives students have to use AI for their coursework, have reported a crushing amount of AI-enabled cheating.
I’ve heard less about an increase in “analog” violations of academic integrity—reports on that welcome— but perhaps an environment in which AI cheating is common diminishes people’s inhibitions against other kinds of cheating.
We’ve discussed in the past ways of preventing AI cheating or trying to make cheating “not worth it.”
That’s all well and good, but one question I’d like to ask about is: What should one do about all the cheating that remains?
Part of the answer to this may come from official university policies. But most of us have the discretion to decide whether to go the “official” route. Do you?
Should we?
How much of a burden will it be to officially report the cheating, given how much there is? Any one case can be time consuming: forms must be completed, extra meetings must be held, hearings may sometimes be required. What if one has 10 or 20 or 50 instances of cheating at the same time?
What is the university’s likely response to the kind of cheating you’re reporting? Are you likely to be supported by the administration? Are the disciplinary measures for those found to have violated the honor code trivial?
What effects will officially reporting the cheating have? Will the student caught be less likely to cheat? Will case confidentiality cut too much against the deterrent effect that reporting one student might have on others?
Is this a collective action problem? One might hope for university-wide measures to curb cheating if enough of it is reported. But such measures may be unlikely to arise if only a few professors here and there report cheating. Any one of us may be skeptical that our own reporting of cheating is going to make enough of a difference, and so be discouraged from reporting, and so no university-wide measures arise. Would it make a difference if faculty members at a university formed a pact to each more carefully attend to cheating and officially report it when they find it?
Discussion of these and related questions welcome.
This is why our department now requires all exams to be in person, even for online courses, and for 60%+ of assessments to be conducted in person. Otherwise it’s unmanageable.
One thing that has happened a few times here is when large numbers of students are failed for AI work but not reported, they form a syndicate and challenge the grade on the grounds that the instructor did not follow the official procedure.
Of course, if you follow the official procedure and report dozens a semester, you get called in for a (friendly but…) meeting with the dean.